I don’t remember what the shell and terminal emulator situation looked like, but I do remember that the installer specifically asks you to choose how you want to partition, so it seems unfair to me to complain about it being the “default”.
I put it on my laptop, which I barely use, and just had it still running Win10 until the SSD died. It seems really nice for that purpose, to just get a quick and easy install for a secondary device, while keeping access to everything else I like about Arch.
Well, that wasn’t a “complain” as a default by me. Its a valid choice (besides Fish I think), I just don’t agree with that choice. What I meant is, if I don’t use this default anyway, then why would I need to install the distribution of it? It’s like choosing Kubuntu to install, only to remove it and then turn it into GNOME. I know this is an extreme example, but hopefully that makes it a bit more clear what I initially meant.
I don’t remember what the shell and terminal emulator situation looked like, but I do remember that the installer specifically asks you to choose how you want to partition, so it seems unfair to me to complain about it being the “default”.
I put it on my laptop, which I barely use, and just had it still running Win10 until the SSD died. It seems really nice for that purpose, to just get a quick and easy install for a secondary device, while keeping access to everything else I like about Arch.
Well, that wasn’t a “complain” as a default by me. Its a valid choice (besides Fish I think), I just don’t agree with that choice. What I meant is, if I don’t use this default anyway, then why would I need to install the distribution of it? It’s like choosing Kubuntu to install, only to remove it and then turn it into GNOME. I know this is an extreme example, but hopefully that makes it a bit more clear what I initially meant.