Which is the easiest to install and use rolling release distribution, preferably based on arch linux?

Arch Linux.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Beginners%27_Guide

1 members found this post helpful.

I would second that, if you follow the beginers guide and use the excellent documentation in the ArchWiki Arch is very easy to set up.
There are also Archbang, Chakra and I think a few others.
But I don't see the point in those distros, if you are not willing to put the effort in Arch with building it up from the ground and learning how it works, it would be better to not run Arch in the first place. Like almost every rolling release distro, Arch will break at same point and then it is up to you to get it working again, which will be very difficult if you don't know how to fix it.
The only rolling release distro i know of that is more tailored for the beginner (which means less knowledge is needed to keep it running) is PCLinuxOS.

1 members found this post helpful.

To answer you question with a question (2 questions actually):

1. Why do you think you want/need a "rolling release" distribution?
2. What do you find difficult/confusing about Arch?

I am not a computer professional. I want an easy to install and use distro (gui software preferred) which I can install once and then keep upgrading regularly. Hence, there should be no need to reinstall a new version every few months, often with very different software. Arch is obviously a good distro but the initial learning is more steeper there. For example, you need to install and setup video drivers and xorg etc also yourself, obviously from the command line.

The easiest rolling-release distro is LMDE: Linux Mint Debian Edition.
http://www.linuxmint.com/download_lmde.php
This is 100% compatible with Debian testing, but with the added Mint user-friendliness. You get a choice of Xfce or KDE versions.

Arch, as Tobi says, will break. That's putting it mildly. When I test a distro, I run the main programs from the CLI to see if bash reports any problems. The last time I tested Arch, many of the programs gave critical warnings; one gave over 20 warnings, 6 labeled critical! Arch is for hobbyists who enjoy tinkering with things. Since you don't fancy the task of setting it up in the first place, I assume that doesn't include you.

PCLinuxOS is not bad, so long as you stick to the KDE default. At all costs avoid their Xfce version.

1 members found this post helpful.

Arch users believe that their philosophy/methodology saves time/effort over the long haul.

I did not find:

to be particularly confusing/time consuming, but depending on you hardware & learning style, your mileage may vary.

ps You complain about the annoyance of upgrading/reinstalling other distos, but keep in mind you are only talking about a few hours a year. You will probably not reduce your total sys admin time by switching to a "rolling release" distro; only redistribute it: small incremental updates every day/week vs. large release updates every 6-24 months. This is the reason that "rolling release" is not the popular choice for business/government/education/science, because sys admins do not want the uncertainty of whether the system will work reliably from week-to-week. For a home/hobby user who can deal with this uncertainty (or, perhaps, even enjoy it!) then a rolling release might be the right choice.

2 members found this post helpful.

I recently installed Arch Linux and found it very easy especially with the excellent Wiki and documentation that is provided for Arch. The Beginner's Guide walks you through every step and if there's a problem you can usually find the answer to it on their website or with Google. Not only was it easy to install, but everything just worked. I had a nice Xfce4 desktop with all the software I needed setup in no time and my devices worked without having me to really do anything. It's by far one of the best distros I have worked with recently and I love having a system that is always up to date.

Hmm...
- Easy to install
- Based on Arch
- Xorg and GUI software

You should seriously check out ArchBang.
http://archbang.org/

Moved: This thread is more suitable in <Linux-Distributions> and has been moved accordingly to help your thread/question get the exposure it deserves.

One other option that hasn't been mentioned is Opensuse tumbleweed. I don't think it is as bleeding edge as Arch, but it seems to fit your criteria. Opensuse is very gui orientated with it's Yast.
I use Opensuse, (and love it) but i do not use the tumbleweed edition, so i can not comment on how stable ect it is. I don't see many suse users here at LQ, so if you are interested, you'd probably get better info from the opensuse official forums.
Here's a link with more info:
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Tumbleweed

Thanks all for your responses. I decided to try Arch itself and it is not that difficult to setup. But if there is a hitch, it takes a long time to get sorted out. It is certainly very good for those interested in learning components of a distro, but not if you want a stable gui OS so that you can focus on your (non-computer) professional work.

I also realize that this 'rolling release' facility where you can update any time has also got its limitations. One needs to keep some time off for upgrading, as it is likely to throw up problems that would need to be sorted out. One needs to compare this with downloading a new well-configured version of a distro every 6 months or so to upgrade your OS. There are both advantages and disadvantages.

I know this thread is getting old, but nonetheless it should be updated: Manjaro is quite new, is based on arch, and supposedly easier to install, with the "advantage" of being a true rolling distro, like its parent, arch. I think one of these days I will try it; I am also the kind of user that dislikes to upgrade the distro at regular intervals, to find that many things have been changed, to the point of not likeing it anymore: example, the notorious Canonical with Ubuntu's distros. I am still using ubuntu 10.04, because I prefer the gnome2 look and feel, and unfortunately, this version is not "supported" anymore! Take for example Microsoft: in my job we have plenty of PCs running Winblows XP, still looking and feeling the same (viruses included) like at the beggining, many years ago. What the heck!

Maxei DeVraie

Since this thread has been updated, I'll add my experiences.

Bridge does a good job of installing Arch, and then you use the Arch repository.
Manjaro is Arch-based, but has its own repository, which presumably filters out some bugs. The installer is easier than Bridge's.

Mint (LMDE), Semplice, SolydXK, Solus, and Swift all do a reasonable job on Debian Unstable. LMDE and SolydXK are semi-rolling-release: the updates are delivered in monthly bundles, so that there's a change to check things. Like anything that closely follows Debian, there's a lack of graphical configuration tools, except in Mint.

PCLinuxOS is the most user-friendly RR distro. It avoids being bleeding-edge, so you don't get nasty surprises. Stick to the KDE version, though.

Foresight has a package manager which keeps a record of what it's done. If something breaks after an update, conary can do a rollback to restore things to the previous condition. Foresight's easy to install, too.

Sabayon is Gentoo-based and very buggy.

1 members found this post helpful.

SolusOS is based on Debian stable, not Unstable. Additionally, it is switching to the pisi package manager and may fork in the future.

1 members found this post helpful.