• Why Antergos instead of Arch || Manjaro


    Hi guys,
    I was using debian for a couple of years, but I tried Arch and will stick to it or its derivates.
    Now I am wondering if I should use Antergos or Manjaro instead of continuing with Arch.

    Somehow I love to daily update my Arch installations but I am sure that I should better spend my time working with computers instead of maintaining the system.

    So, why do you guys use Antergos? Or why have you moved away from Arch or Manjaro?

  • I firsτ met linux some years ago as I was trying to find a solution to save my data from my old laptop and I found all the help I needed from ubuntu local community.

    So I used ubuntu up till 10.04 edition when they decided to change from good old gnome to unity.
    Then I moved to kde with debian, linuxmint and sabayon.

    Now I am using antergos (kde) for theese reasons:

    1. It was the only distro that didn`t induce high temperatures in my laptop
    2. Installing was simple and easy
    3. Everything was working fine after instalation
      and still is.
    4. I found also help in antergos forum for 1-2 problems that I had about installing applications, that in that time were not included in aur

    I did not choose arch because I don`t have the time and knowledge for reading and and setting it up.

    I didn`t choose manjaro because when I tried to install it (before antergos), the installation failed.

  • I didn’t know or wish to know all the intricacies of the Arch way but I did want the best distro I could find. Tried Debian but was too bland. Tried Manjaro but they stopped supporting Gnome & wasn’t full on Arch but I did like the Arch part. Antergos just ticked every box from day 1 of install over a year ago.

    I get Antergos forum help when needed PLUS Arch wiki info without the elitist attitude of pure Arch users

  • question is Antergos versus Manjaro?

    Manjaro is Arch-Based, but you cant call using Arch, because have its own repo’s and framework how hardware drivers en kernel works…

    Antergos is basicly a Good arch installer, and refreshing the iso everymonth and goes straight forward as Arch.

    Manjaro is different story, update packs you never know iso’s are big but iso can be stay for 1 a 2 months or more. the way it updates of Manjaro is Arch > Manjaro unstable-repo > testing > stable , but also does not guarantee the stability as wel :) is more story about Stability versus security… if Firefox get updated, Antergos Arch is quick, Manjaro can wait for aproximal 2 weeks… even a QT5 issue can block a update for 1 month or bit more … Rolling release is mostly straight forward.

  • LINUX = LINUX

    ANTERGOS = lINUX = ARCH

    Enjoy the Best !!!

    Mis respetos.-

  • Thanks for your answers so far…

    If there is no difference between my current Arch installation and the installation with Antergos, why is there an additional repo in the Antergos installation?

  • Not there any difference, not put or removed anything, even in an installation of Arch you can put the repos of antergos, without problems and I say it because I did.

    Mis respetos.-

  • Antergos = Arch + Cnchi

    Antergos directly uses unmodified, native Arch repos. Antergos is not an Arch clone. It is the graphical installer - Cnchi - that installs native Arch. Stop.

    Antergos has one additional repo - [antergos]. It mainly contains some additional useful packages, not available in standard Arch.

    With the default, highest [antergos] priority few packages slightly alter Antergos behaviour relatively to Arch. Currently these are Cinnamon and Mate packages.

    The [antergos] repo priority in Antergos may be lowered - it may be placed below Arch repos.

    The [antergos] repo may be freely added to native Arch Linux. Above or below the native Arch repos.

    There’s no any difference between Antergos with lowered [antergos] and Arch Linux with [antergos] added below native Arch repos. Both are closer to native Arch Linux than to Antergos.

    There’s no any difference between Antergos with [antergos] at the default highest priority and Arch Linux with [antergos] added above native Arch repos. Both are closer to Antergos than to native Arch Linux.

    There’s no any difference between Antergos without [antergos] repo (it may be removed) and Arch Linux.

  • There’s no any difference between Antergos without [antergos] repo (it may be removed) and Arch Linux.

    Don’t say that! Arch users will eat you! :grimacing:

  • @karasu said in Why Antergos instead of Arch || Manjaro:


    Don’t say that! Arch users will eat you! :grimacing:

    I hope they do not condescend to read our forum :) .

  • @just said in Why Antergos instead of Arch || Manjaro:

    @karasu said in Why Antergos instead of Arch || Manjaro:


    Don’t say that! Arch users will eat you! :grimacing:

    I hope they do not condescend to read our forum :) .

    As a “pure” Arch user–and also a user of Antergos, Manjaro, Debian, ad infinitum–I really take umbrage at these statements. It’s ALL Linux–it’s ALL good. :D

    Regards

  • Well well,
    I will continue using pure Arch and recommend Antergos for quick installations then. :)
    The purpose of the extra Antergos repo is still not clear for me, but since I can find almost everything in the official Arch repos, it doesn´t really matter. ( mysql-workbench seems to be a good alternative for dBeaver on my machine now )

    Thank you :)

  • @SteffNC
    We put in the Antergos repos:

    • Icons, themes and packages that our installer needs.
    • Other packages that we want to install (most of them from AUR, but we need them in compiled form) or packages that are useful to our users (so they don’t have to spend time compiling them).

    Cheers!

  • @karasu Thanks for the precise answer.

  • @SteffNC said in Why Antergos instead of Arch || Manjaro:

    The purpose of the extra Antergos repo is still not clear for me

    I have noted that, other than themes, icons, etc., the Antergos repository contains a few important packages that need to be available to the user 24/7. I recall Octopi being a good example (IIRC). A few months ago–or maybe a year or so ago?–Octopi was briefly unavailable in the AUR–maintenance issue, I guess. That’s fine; it is an AUR package. But that doesn’t help someone who has just installed Arch–to find out the front end to the AUR that they want to use is not available.

    But Antergos has/had Octopi in the Antergos repo, so it was available to Antergos users. It is for reasons such as that, that a separate repo is and should be available. IMHO. ;)

    Regards

  • Good example. But not the only.

    It’s difficult, if not impossible, to completely exclude AUR from being used in Arch. yaourt is the best tool to work with it. It is present in the AUR. But not in the default Arch repos.

    How to install yaourt from AUR without having an access to AUR? A difficult task for those who approaches Arch for the first time.

    Meanwhile, yaourt is included in the [antergos] repo. Cnchi installs it by default. AUR is immediately available in a newly installed Antergos.

manjaro8 arch25 Posts 16Views 5222
Log in to reply