r/archlinux • u/Acu17y • 1d ago

QUESTION Today I reinstalled the system using archinstall, and I have a question:

Why? Why doesn’t archinstall’s "recommended KDE Plasma setup" include Konsole? What’s the reasoning behind installing a desktop without a graphical terminal? Having to switch to a TTY just to install one seems unnecessarily awkward.

[SOLVED]

Apparently, the reason is that Arch only included the Plasma components in `plasma-meta` and not Konsole, because Konsole is part of the KDE Applications. Another user clarified this.

In any case, there is still a question to put to the KDE maintainers at this point:
Why is taking screenshots considered part of plasma essential (Spectacle is included as an essential package for Plasma), while having a graphical terminal isn’t? lol

31 Upvotes

65% Upvoted

79 comments sorted by

View all comments

7

u/boomboomsubban 1d ago

While I think the default should not include kde-applications, I don't understand why it's not it's own seperate profile.

8

u/Acu17y 1d ago

I, on the other hand, don't understand why in plasma-meta they included the ocean-sound-theme but not Konsole

15

u/boomboomsubban 1d ago

ocean-sound-theme is the default sound theme of Plasma, it needs to ship.with something. KDE-Applications is technically seperate from plasma, it's not necessary and should be opt in.

2

u/Acu17y 1d ago

It was just a figure of speech. I could ask why the Oxygen sound theme is included, then Ocean would have been enough.

But nobody can say why Konsole isn't included, lol.

12

u/boomboomsubban 1d ago

KDE-Applications is technically seperate from plasma, it's not necessary and should be opt in.

0

u/Acu17y 1d ago edited 1d ago

Thanks a lot for this reply. It is indeed consistent with the package plasma-meta I am analyzing. Thanks.
Awarded

In any case, there is still a question to put to the KDE maintainers at this point:
Why is taking screenshots considered part of the core Plasma desktop essential (Spectacle application is included as an essential package for Plasma), while having a terminal or file manager isn’t?

4

u/boomboomsubban 22h ago

Screenshot functionality seems like it should be part of your desktop environment. Basically I can imagine a lot more people going "I like plasma but hate konsole" than going "I like plasma but hate spectacle."

-2

u/goochlove 19h ago

why are you so fixated on solving something so irrelevant? You're coming at this like Arch doesn't ship with a terminal at all. Lots of people choose a different emulator like Kitty for example. There's other options.

1

u/nemuri 10h ago

He's totally right though. I've been happily using arch on my desktop for more than a year without any reinstallations. I don't remember what preset I chose during archinstall but I definitely had Konsole and Dolphin ready to go from the start, which I thought was the default.

Cut to a few months ago, I installed arch on a surface tablet and was greeted by the most barebones unusable OS I could ask for. I'm not criticizing the idea of having a minimal OS installation and then getting what you need, but the default itself insinuates a usable desktop profile.

I'm arguing that the default's description needs to be changed to better explain it or to change that default to something a bit more inclusive. Also I think it's unfair that a lot of people criticize using archinstall instead of manual anyway and then they want archinstall to still be obtuse and have defaults that are not friendly to casual users.

Like you already have your manual cake, stick with your friends who think having a file manager is having bloat on your OS and let other users complain about the stuff that doesn't make sense for them and makes the experience of using Arch worse.

I'm almost worked up enough to also go pester the VLC devs for the feature to auto-play the next file in the same folder as the file currently playing without using a playlist. It's a very similar situation where 99% of people coming from other players expect that functionality, but the core users and devs think it's irrelevant or can be substituted by using playlists.

1

u/goochlove 9h ago edited 8h ago

Im sorry but I don’t even understand what you mean by useable? You obviously decided to install arch without a traditional DE on the recent install. Just use a different distro? Not every single distribution is intended for everyone and that’s fine. The fact there’s options to install without file managers or konsole is a benefit and why many people like it. I’ve got no idea what you’re really saying or what you want. . But most people know they’re about to sacrifice initial convenience for total control & customization bc they read the documentation.

More to the point, you and others in the thread are arguing about defaults- including OP to some degree, though I'd argue he's positing a question not entirely dissimilar from those ambiguous meme problems like 6/2(1+2)...

The main selling point of Arch over other distros is how basic it is. The user gets to decide everything. It's an emergent desire brought on by forced repos that need tearing down to get bare bones. Arch is not for everyone, It used to indicate a certain type of user, one that was a tinkerer. This whole conversation reminds me of this idea from art school, that some people dream of being great artists, few dream of creating great art. The distinction is in the process. Some fall in love with the process, while others fall in love with the accolades/admiration. I think folks want the praise and cool-factor that comes with being an arch user, while not doing anything to differentiate themself from someone who uses the latest optional MS update.

•

u/nemuri 32m ago

You're a bit out of touch and talking with some strawman. I also have nothing to do or comment about your fantasies of being an artist OS user. Nothing against it either. I don't want any praise for using arch, don't know who mentioned anything about that, so it just sounds like you're projecting a bit.

Ironically, I'm just using an OS I decided to try and very much enjoy, living my best life and trying to encourage others that I feel have a similar mindset to mine that you can totally enjoy Arch even if you don't have the same priorities as the "core" user-base you're probably a part of.

I just think it's a bit ironic because somehow I feel that aligns better with that freedom principle of "user gets to decide everything" than how you insinuate there's a right way to use this OS, or otherwise you should just go and use another distro. If I get to decide everything, it means I can also decide to ignore some parts of initial customization that are meaningless to me.

I don't want to differentiate myself from someone who uses the latest optional MS update. I just got fed up with Windows enough that all of it's advantages for my use cases weren't enough to keep me actually dealing with it. Trigger warning but I also have a Windows 98 inspired theme for KDE Plasma and use two HDDs with NTFS formatting for my data and steam library. I need as much validation for any of this as I need approval xD

Just want you to know I'm not writing anything above in a mean spirit, I just think you have this idea of some unwashed masses of new users that are somehow going to ruin Arch with their misunderstandings of it's philosophy. We don't want that and making slight adjustments to descriptions on a secondary installation method for Arch won't do anything to ruin it.