It’s not funny if you have to explain it but it was mostly a joke, without rolling eyes. Also making fun a bit about how easy it is to make a claim that something is better than another thing and leave it at that, which is very common in every population but in particular something you hear from the arch one. I use Arch btw.
> Like offering users a GUI click-through installer?
I can't say if it's a joke or if you are serious.
But if you like an installer, there's manjaro.
Personally, I think install shouldn't need a click-through installer: it should be done by a commandline, to have a finer control over all the details.
With Ubuntu, I only used the installer iso to type Control-Shift-A to get a terminal, install rsync and do my tinkering.
I was obviously being sarcastic, but the sarcasm was earnest. For the most part, there shouldn't be any details to control. Just pick defaults that work for 99% users and let them get on with their life.
>But if you like an installer, there's manjaro.
Manjaro is not Arch. My comment was a criticism of Arch Linux, not Manjaro.
Then can you tell me how to use the ubuntu GUI install to a ZFS encrypted root, without zsys, without grub but with a .efi packed kernel?
Or how can you mount the efi partition to new systemd location /efi instead of /boot/efi (ex: if you're not using grub) without breaking the install?
There are just too many choices for too many people. It's best not to play, and let it be a commandline problem. You rarely have to reinstall without another OS or boot media, so doing a chroot and copy-pasting the right commands (or rsync or untar a working master image) is just simpler.
