Thanks for the thorough answer.

It has been my pleasure. Though, most of it was part of the suggestion to use uBlue 😅. I hope you'll manage regardless of how you go about it 😊!

I’ll probably just try the surface kernel

Fair.

but I’ll look more into what ublue is.

I'm eager to help out if required 😜.

The problem with SpaceVim is that it offers a lot of toggles that are easy to switch but there are no examples for more ‘custom’ config and I struggled to figure it out. There’s a lot of examples and guides for nvim so it was easier. I don’t know, maybe it was just me but with SpaceVim I also didn’t really see what’s possible. With nvim I just found long lists of useful plugins that you can add one by one.

Makes a lot of sense. Documentation is indeed very important. Thank you so much for sharing your insights and experiences! Much appreciated!

As a long-time Vi user I would highly recommend giving it a shot for a solid month to see if it clicks for you.

Makes sense. Thanks for the tip!

Emacs is dead near as I can tell.

Am I correct to assume that you think that Emacs is dying? If so, would you be so kind to elaborate on why you think that's the case?

Thanks! Those should provide some decent pointers.

Would it be a fair assessment to suggest that LunarVim was chosen primarily for the fact that it came out first? Like, either one Astronvim, LazyVim and NvChad might have done a similarly great job, but you were already using LunarVim and saw no reason to switch as the functionality they provide is relatively close to one another.

Furthermore, because you were already accustomed to Vim, you were able to properly utilize LunarVim as a startingpoint. As such, switching from startingpoint would only amount to more work without any real benefits.

I use lunarvim almost exclusively.

Was it a very conscious choice? Like have you tried the others but (somehow) didn't like them etc? And if so, why do you prefer LunarVim over the others?

I’ve had a bit of a look into Tumbleweed and it sounds like it’s similar to Fedora in how it handles packaging of proprietary software which I found pretty annoying, but I could be wrong.

It's true that Arch is leaner towards proprietary software if that's what you mean. An example of this is how the Nvidia drivers are just found within repos for Arch (thus enabled by default), while on both Fedora and openSUSE it's not found in the official repos. Both have made it easier over the years to somehow include options and whatnot within the installer to ease Nvidia users in, but the experience on Arch is definitely smoother.

Furthermore, Fedora is indeed (kinda) hardcore on FOSS, similarly to Debian. While Arch simply doesn't care in most cases. My relatively short endeavor to find out where openSUSE fits in seems to point towards openSUSE leaning closer to Debian and Fedora.

What's perhaps important to note is that in all cases there are third party repos that can easily be enabled to acquire proprietary software.

That was perfect! Thanks for sharing.

Thanks for your kind words. Much appreciated! 🙂

It does sound alot like they are taking time tested designs that have been in use in the datacenter & Infrastructure side within virtualization offerings for years

To be honest, I'm absolutely clueless on any of that 😂. So, unfortunately I don't feel confident to talk about that. Would you be so kind to enlighten me?

What exactly am I confirming? Apologies, if I sound obtuse*.

Thanks for answering!

Just to be clear; the 'metrics' on how popular Manjaro is compared to Arch and other Arch-based distros reveal to us that Manjaro has been going strong for quite some time. While the numbers of its adoption during its heyday were IMO completely justifiable. I think that -currently- it continues to stay more relevant than it otherwise would have any right of based on its merits. Which has been something that has caught my attention and made me curious to find out why that was the case.

Thus, if you had been a relatively newer user, then I would have loved to know what made you gravitate towards Manjaro in the first place. But, as you've been using it since before the controversies and archinstall, I think your reasons to start using Manjaro were completely legit and the continued use of Manjaro is at least justifiable.

Don't get me wrong; I'm not in the "Manjaro is blatantly bad"-camp, I just think that it attracts more newer users than is desirable.

Off-topic, but how long have you been using Manjaro? I am genuinely interested, btw*.

Thanks for answering! Now I've got a better picture of what you're trying to achieve. However, unfortunately, I've yet to dabble into LFS. So I'm afraid that I might not be that helpful 😭. Wish you the best of luck though!

The GUI elements missing in Arch are missing in Mint and Ubuntu, Fedora, PopOS, all of them.

I would agree that they're roughly in the same ballpark as long as you had picked KDE Plasma on Arch. Though I would argue that Mint and PopOS have a noticeable lead, though I don't think that point deserves more discussion. However, none of them come close to something like openSUSE's YaST or MX' Tools. That's why I deliberately mentioned them. Perhaps worth a watch for those wondering how Windows compares to different Linux distros GUI-wise.

I happen to be struggling through an audio issue right now. Can you find an OS that lets you change the Audio sample and bit rates without messing with config files ? This is basic function, and the PulseAudio and Pipewire have been around long enough for a GUI to have been created, but no, it doesn’t exist.

I'm unfortunately unaware of any solution for that. Wish you good luck!