1. The Arch Wiki is the gold‑standard for Linux documentation
“I still find myself reading their wiki from time to time. It’s a phenomenal resource.” – dietr1ch
“The Arch Wiki has become the goto source for every time I need a real answer… it should just become my default for everything Linux.” – Groxx
“I use the Arch Wiki as my personal software configuration journal.” – foxrider
The consensus is that the wiki’s breadth, depth, and up‑to‑date nature make it useful even for non‑Arch users, and many people cite it as the reason they stay on or switch to Arch.
2. Arch’s “bleeding‑edge” nature is both a learning tool and a pain point
“It was a smooth sea never made a skilled sailor.” – thr0w4w4y1337
“The switch to systemd is the last time I FUBARed my system.” – benoliver999
“I got sick of the rolling release and Arch’s constant breakages, so I started looking into the alternatives.” – ofalkaed
Users praise the hands‑on experience that forces them to understand the system, but they also lament frequent breakages, confusing updates, and the need for constant maintenance.
3. Documentation quality, man‑pages, and the rise of LLMs shape troubleshooting habits
“Unfortunately there's a trend lately where many newer CLI tools don’t have a man page.” – nextaccountic
“I was definitely the same way at one point but it’s worth mentioning that the wiki remains a valuable resource even if you aren’t using Arch itself.” – beepbooptheory
“I do not use Arch but still use the wiki as a primary reference… I also use the AUR… the Arch wiki is a blessing.” – moxvallix
The discussion covers the need for proper help output, tools like help2man, and concerns that LLMs may replace or dilute human‑written documentation, potentially eroding the very knowledge base that keeps the Arch community thriving.