This reminds me of my first time installing Linux. I tried to install most recent version of Ubuntu at the time but for some reason it couldn’t install and it wiped out Windows partition. Fortunetely, I was able to install LTS version in first try.
I’m glad you are enjoying Linux. Welcome to the penguin land.
Ubuntu - Loved it in 2006-2012ish but I jumped ship when Amazon appeared in search. Great place to start my Linux journey at the time.
Manjaro - Only distro to ever break entirely on me. I didn’t care enough to try and figure out why.
Tried endeavor and stock arch but they weren’t my cup of tea. No real issues with them though.
Fedora - I liked for a few years but abandoned after the RHEL drama this summer. Seems to be going the way of Ubuntu. Maybe that’s just my opinion.
I use and like Solus a lot but they didn’t update anything for 2 years until this summer. I use it on my gaming PC and an old laptop for web browsing but nothing important. It’s always been solid for me, I just worry about it going extinct. They do have an updated road map and seem re-energized though. I also think it’s a good beginner distro because you don’t have to dive into terminal much, and a good distro if you are a pro, but kind of bad if you are an intermediate user because there aren’t a ton of resources on it that bigger distros have.
I mostly use Debian these days. Stable on my server. Testing on everything else. I don’t see me abandoning it anytime soon.
The differences between distros are the things you mentioned. They all use the Linux kernel, so the differences are in the DE, installer, theme, default packages, and package manager. These changes come about from design choices: rolling vs versioned releases, stability goals, FOSS vs proprietary packages/repositories, things like systemd vs alternatives, and overall goals/use cases (lightweight, server, etc).
A distro can be as little as a theme change. The famous Hannah Montana Linux is KUbuntu with a custom theme, icon pack, and Hannah Montana as the background.
So basically if i have all Voidlinux’s programs installed on NixOS, i can have some decent amount of packages (that are not heavily depending on init systems or some other non trivial stuff) from Void repos running on NixOS?
I wouldn’t compare void and nix since both of them follow very different approaches. Void is more like a traditional distro while nixos on the other hand uses configurations for setup.
And no you can’t use void on nix os as said above. Hannah Montana linux and kubuntu uses Ubuntu as the base that’s what he meant.
Im not talking about comparing these distros, nor using void on NixOS. Im asking if i had all packages that are preinstalled on void, present on NixOS as well. Would i be able to run some packages from void linux repos on NixOS? If i make nix derivation with package from void repo and install it, would it work?
If the same void package exists in the nix os repo then sure. You can’t use a void package in nix os is the thing I would like to point out other than using distrobox.
Ubuntu, because snaps break shit and don’t work right a lot of the time, also they left people hanging with 32 bit support which isn’t great (for being a Legacy OS for weak computers it’s not a great look for them, or all the Linux distros that followed them).
There were a lot of problems with Fedora and CentOS, none of them as bad as Ubuntu though. Most were either instability or software availability due to lacking RPM versions of the software I needed.
Arch itself hasn’t given me many problems but it is ideologically problematic for a lot of reasons (mainly the elitism) and it is also a rolling release which isn’t great if you don’t like being a guinea pig and getting software before all the bugs have been ironed out.
Linux is great about providing that feeling of discovery. New tools, new processes, new paradigm… It’s the best way to breathe new life into an old piece of hardware.
If this is your first major step, congratulations! If you’re a regular, great job, keep it up; eventually you’ll be a grey beard with the rest of us.
Because there is no native gui. For most things to configure in Linux there is a webui but not a simple Gui built in. Configuration files like squid.conf smb.conf nginx.com… then we have logs but here I think I never checked for a Gui, does it work for remote ssh easily? Can you restart service easy?
I couldn't even come up with a take. I guess a conspiracy theory that Microsoft is kidnapping the internet's families to keep them from talking about Linux.
Which is…still not an OS. It’s a distribution. Specifically, it’s a fork of Ubuntu. To reiterate what the OP was saying, they’re catering to the Windows audience, who understand the concept of a “new Windows version,” but who wouldn’t understand the concept of a distribution.
It’s actually not even a distro, according to their own description at least
Is it a distro?
Not quite, it’s a package archive with the latest KDE software on top of a stable base. While we have installable images, unlike full Linux distributions we’re only interested in KDE software.
They probably feel like the name distribution means more than just slapping a DE on it and basically a PPA. Then again, haven’t stopped loads of distros from doing that hah.
Could be another way to discourage people using it as a beginner distro or something.
What exactly is an OS to you? All distros are operating systems because they ship all the tools and utilities need for the system to function (on top of a package manager).
The fact that the KDE devs didn’t write that code themselves doesn’t disqualify it from being an OS.
An OS is the interface layer between hardware and software. It’s the first code that runs after the boot loader, and it exposes an API for syscalls that allow user processes to allocate typically restricted resources, while also tracking and maintaining those allocated resources, doing process scheduling, and a bunch of other critical tasks.
All distros are operating systems because they ship all the tools and utilities need for the system to function
All distros contain operating systems (or, more accurately, kernels), or, rather, are built on top of them. A distribution is a collection of curated software, along with an init system and, for linux, package manager, and, frequently, a particular desktop environment. These pieces of software are, on some level, superfluous. You can have an OS without them. They don’t comprise the OS as a distinct conceptual layer of a computer system, of which there is the hardware, operating system, application, and user layers. The operating system is just Linux - because that is the interface layer between the hardware and software.
Saying “all distros are operating systems” is like saying “all cars are engines.” It’s just wrong. And I don’t care what wikipedia has to say about it.
Neon is more of a testbed than a proper distro (they don’t actually even use that word).
Is this “the KDE distro”?
Nope. KDE believes it is important to work with many distributions, as each brings unique value and expertise for their respective users. This is one project out of hundreds from KDE.
Not quite, it’s a package archive with the latest KDE software on top of a stable base. While we have installable images, unlike full Linux distributions we’re only interested in KDE software.
I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as Linux is in fact KDE/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, KDE plus Linux.
Haha (but in all seriousness, his lack of understanding of the issue was embarrassing, even if he did apologise afterwards; it’s like Ballmer: everyone remembers him saying “Linux is a cancer”, yet nobody remembers him apologising, when he saw Satya Nadella found a way to make money off Linux, rather than look for ways to tear it down as competition). In both cases these men saw that a change in their stance would allow them to achieve their goals (of promoting free software, and making money, respectively) much more easily).
So here you can see me behaving like the average Linux user, hating on Microsoft and being elitist about my distro, and I’m done ranting about M$.
hmm, looks like my link still works… clicking on any of those words should take them to the answer, which is a bit too involved for me to summarize :). if for some reason your client isn’t reading it, here’s the naked link:
I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re refering to as Windows, is in fact, Adware/NT, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, Adware plus NT.
A distro isn’t just a way to interact with the Linux operating system. It’s a collection of tools that helps you do it. Some tools are just sharper that others. The community just likes debating about this important nuance. It’s not that complicated.
My tools of choice come from the famous blue logo distro.
I think it’s fairly obvious that they mean Arch because they are sharing which distro they use without being prompted, which is inline with a common running joke about doing the same thing, btw.
I use the terminal in a variety of circumstances (like working on Node.js and other programming projects) where there is either no good GUI alternative or using a CLI is actually faster. I’ve been using computers since 1989 and my first operating system was MS-DOS, so the thought of using a CLI when necessary doesn’t bother me.
linux
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.