Think about what? Just about the two distros in general?

I use both (Gentoo on my main system and server, Arch on an old laptop) and I think they're both fine for what they are. Although they both have some BSD influences (ABS and portage are both sort of extensions of the ports system) and they both market themselves to "advanced" users, they are really pretty different.

I'd say that in the grand scheme of things, Arch is willing to sacrifice options or choices in order to reduce complexity (which is what is meant by simplicity for the developers) while Gentoo is significantly more complex but also more flexible. You can change low-level system components (libc, init, compiler flags, even the package manager) much more easily on Gentoo than you can on Arch. On the flip side portage has dozens of variables and hundreds of USE flags. pacman, by contrast, has relatively few options even compared to something like apt. The Arch Build System allows you to compile and customize specific packages relatively places to go to the appears the point I think that was said and and easily, but if you want to set options across your entire system portage is more efficient. Thanks again I appreciate you can mount it was just a i

It depends what you want. If you want really fine-grained control, Gentoo is worth its. If you don't need that level of control and are generally about about a o fine with leaving that stuff to your distro developers, then Arch is alIU fine. Thanks your your oi Thanks forget