is there anything important that i should know before installing it?
i have zero experience about Arch, except it's good wiki pages.

Well, I would restate that as - "it has good wiki pages". Excellent documentation.

A corollary of that is that you will be expected to read the documentation. Has been one of my distros of choice for many years

1 members found this post helpful.

1) It's a rolling release and uses bleeding edge software, so you need to update frequently. Be prepared for occasional glitches after an update.
2)Basically it follows the KISS principle internally; you aren't insulated from the OS by multiple layers of software. It's definitely not for newbies.
3) There's a very strong community and great emphasis on doing it "The Arch Way". You need to pass an intelligence test to register at their forum!
4) If you want software that isn't in the repository, there's an Arch version of slackbuilds called AUR and they have practically everything that's going.

1 members found this post helpful.

thanks to you both.

1) 2) sounds good to me. and 3) i knew already.

would Arch linux be minimal, like not bloated?

Yes. I use it without GUI on all my ARM (pi + others) devices.

1 members found this post helpful.

managed to solve it, didnt need to google it :P

sounds good, i probably buy pi and install honeypot to it.
https://isc.sans.edu/honeypot.html

I was curious about this distrochooser thing so I gave it a shot. I tried to answer the questions as best I could as I was in 2005 when I started using Linux.

All I can say is that I am glad I did not know about it (or it didn't exist) when I stumbled upon Slackware when I decided to give Linux a whirl. It recommended a plate-load of *buntus, OpenSUSE, Debian, and Magiea. The latter two are the only ones of the ones it recommended that I really like, and Slackware was not in the list (though I am currently using Ubuntu MATE on one machine because of long story and it is working quite nicely, I must say).

Accordingly, I would counsel OP to take its recommendations with a salt lick or two.

Just an aside.

1 members found this post helpful.

I did the same.
The choices were very obvious, as were the results.
I tried it twice, and by the second time I already groked which answer would lead to which result.
After trawling various Linux forums for the better part of a decade, there really wasn't anything new for me in there...

I applaud the effort though, and it might be very helpful for newcomers.
_________

About your question:
- Arch Linux is cutting edge, not bleeding edge. There's a difference. They do try to provide a stable system - unless you enable the [testing] repo.

- For installation you should have a second internet-connected device with the Installation Guide. Internet connected because you will need to click back and forth many times. A hint: the arch wiki is very literal. When something is "recommended", it means you should do it that way unless you're a 100% sure you need to do it differently. Similar goes for all hints and tips: take the time to consider each. There's no superfluous text in there.

1 members found this post helpful.

yea, i were just playing with distro chooser and because i havent tried Arch before i decided to install it.

my set-up has 3 computers, i switched between Arch and Fedora boxes with a flick of a switch, i have a 2 computers connected to same monitor and with that switch i can switch between Arch / fedora.

i failed to install Arch 3 times, faulty hard-drive...
after i removed it and installed a new one i succeeded in installation.

decided to try cinnamon desktop.
its "work in progress" atm, meaning that i have to setup it first

Got it to setup finally. screenshot @ imgur
runs just fine on my older box.

I have never found distro choosers that useful - they seem to be based on one developer's opinion. The last one I used, I tried about 10 times and could not even get it to suggest Debian, which I know is ideal. I told the developer and he took it on board and made it less biased towards other distros. For example, Ubuntu came up often when I said I wanted a stable distro - in real life, I moved from Ubuntu to Debian because of the lack of stability (and Gnome is painful).

i used to use Debian alot in the past, and Slackware.
now my main box is win10 and fedora 31 dual boot.

my firewall's distro is xubuntu, it has been stable enough, i used to use OpenBSD on it.

I did use Xubuntu for my first 4 years of Linux and it is stable - makes me think that Ubuntu's issues (for me) were mostly down to Gnome and snaps.

ive got to say that Arch is really nice. havent had any problems that i couldnt solve. their wiki is _really_ nice