I’ve done full manual installs and archinstall installs of mainline arch and I would argue endevouros is arch. It’s more than just “arch based” it’s literally a basic arch install with calamaris. It updates from official arch repos and arch kernal ect.
While I only tell people I use endevouros I do not understand why anyone cares if an endevouros user says they use arch lol. What is the difference between that and something like archinstall besides slightly easier btrfs configs?
I’d consider CatchyOS to be in the arch based category but not EndevourOS



That’s a good point, and I’d have to partly agree with it being lying. But only if I’m talking to arch enthusiasts or well versed linux enthusiasts.
If I’m talking with someone that only knows a few distro names saying you use arch gets what you are using across without having to explain what EndevourOS is. I don’t think it should be lumped in with other arch based distros that use their own repos either. The default config being so close to archinstall is one of the main reasons I switched