Thanks. That helped a lot. It gave me a good basis for some further googling.
It ended up that the Internal Clock of the hardware interface was deselected in alsamixer. Enabling it fixed the no audio issue.
For the channel remapping I tried a bunch of different config files until finally one actually managed to not be ignored. It’s absurd how many separate configuration files and sound settings menus exist for linux audio and there’s no guarantee the one your editing is even being used. An absolute mess IMO and it’s no wonder people shy away from linux for desktop purposes.
Funny enough, despite getting the channel remapping to work, it’s completely ignored unless you put pulseaudio -k into your user profile. And even now, because the remapped output device doesn’t show up on boot, it has to be manually set to the default output every login.
At least I have the right channels mapped though.
I love linux but god damn is it a hot mess for the simple stuff.
Glad you were able to figure it out. Yeah, there are a lot of settings and different moving parts involved in doing audio. And the config files are all over the place. It can get nasty.
There has to be a way to make your settings and that pipeline the (system) default. Or at least change the profile that gets loaded for your specific soundcard and change and override the channel mapping so it won’t load something else first.
Like SD cards suddenly being read only, then, as mysteriously as it started, they’re read/write again (sometimes while mid-operation)? Yeah. I have that.
Ubuntu. I just don’t like how they do things. I cant even maintain a repo for the machines i host without putting aside multiple terabytes of space. So to me they cant even make it reasonably easy for me to help them and be self reliant on their ecosystem.
Ubuntu when they first switched to Unity. I had been running Ubuntu for 2 or 3 years at that point, but I was already thinking about switching to Debian at the time. I hobbled along for a few weeks on that first version of Unity, but I didn’t like what I was seeing. I took the plunge into Debian, thinking, “If I’m going to have to learn something new anyways, I might as well try switching.”
PopOS and Ubuntu - really just found that I don’t like gnome. Nothing against it, I know some people love it but it is not for me. This would likely apply to any gnome distro, but those were the two I tried and immediately moved on.
Honorable mention: Manjaro because “it just breaks™” but it wasn’t something I noticed immediately and initially liked the os…
You are aware that you can have multiple DEs installed at once, right? Also many distros have multiple different choices for the default DE. I haven’t used it for probably over a decade, but I’m sure Kubuntu, the KDE version of Ubuntu, still exists.
I am aware the DE can be changed, but it was just an honest answer to OP’s question. I downloaded like 8 different distros and put them on flash drives and tried them all out and that was what caused me to move on. I didn’t have kubuntu downloaded to try, probably because canonical seems to treat them as entirely different distros.
ie, some distros have the DE options when looking at the download page or have you choose during the live boot which to use and include multiple in one iso. Ubuntu makes no mention of those separate downloads unless you explore their site a bit further than the download page. It’s a minor difference but makes a difference when you’re grabbing a handful of isos to try out, you might miss it and assume the one iso has all the options available when it doesn’t, or that it is the only option they provide.
As for PopOS I actually did look into changing to KDE and the popular wisdom at the time on message boards was that changing to KDE would possibly or likely undo most of the benefits of the tweaks and changes system 76 made. I don’t have any idea if that is even true, just what came up when searching a few years back.
I get your reasoning, a lot of “re-spins” are hidden away on many distros download pages, but saying something like “I don’t like Ubuntu because it uses Gnome” is like saying “I don’t like Fords because they come with radios”.
Regarding PopOS it probably is true because it probably all GUI specific things setup for new users, anything system level wouldn’t be changed.
I know this isn’t the answer you were looking for, but they’re all the same. Arch, Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, I’ve tried them all, and there isn’t a discernable difference.
Well, I’m currently using VMware on Ubuntu to run Win 10 and Kali Linux. I don’t know what exactly caused the problem, it was either Ubuntu’s updates or VMware’s updates, but now Win 10 is unusable because it crashes (same with Kali Linux)
Ubuntu imho is unstable in and of itself because of the frequent updates so I’m looking for another distro that prioritizes stability.
I would second Debian for stability, it’s what I use for all my VM servers. I have always preferred KVM however, as I had a lot of trouble with VMware hogging my cpu years ago. KVM has the virtual machine manager available for GUI monitoring but I’m not sure how far it goes for creating new VMs as I’ve always handled the setup directly from command line.
Since you’ve been on Ubuntu, I would suggest Debian. The commands are pretty much the same across the board, and it’s one of the most stable distros in the wild.
Well there’s your mistake: using VMware on a Linux host.
QEMU/KVM is where it’s at on Linux, mostly because it’s built into the kernel a bit like Hyper-V is built into Windows. So it integrates much better with the Linux host which leads to fewer problems.
Ubuntu imho is unstable in and of itself because of the frequent updates so I’m looking for another distro that prioritizes stability.
Maybe, but it’s still Linux. There’s always an escape hatch if the Ubuntu packages don’t cut it. But I manage thousands of Ubuntu servers, some of which are very large hypervisors running hundreds of VMs each, and they also run Ubuntu and work just fine.
It’ll definitely run Kali well, Windows will be left without hardware acceleration for 2D/3D so it’ll be a little laggy but it’s usable.
VMware has its own driver that converts enough DirectX for Windows to run smoother and not fall back to the basic VGA path.
But VMware being proprietary software, changing distro won’t make it better so it’s either you deal with the VMware bugs or you deal with stable but slow software rendering Windows.
That said on the QEMU side, it’s possible to attach one of your host’s GPUs to the VM, where it will get full 3D acceleration. Many people are straight up gaming in competitive online games, in a VM with QEMU. If you have more than one GPU, even if it’s an integrated GPU + a dedicated one like is common with most Intel consumer non-F CPUs, you can make that happen and it’s really nice. Well worth buying a used GTX 1050 or RX 540 if your workflow depends on a Windows VM running smoothly. Be sure your CPU and motherboard support it properly before investing though, it can be finicky, but so awesome when it works.
On Vista and up, there’s only the Display Only Driver (DOD) driver which gets resolutions and auto resizing to work, but it’s got no graphical acceleration in itself.
I use virt-manager GUI to control KVM easily, but you can control anything easily with virsh command lines. I dislike VMware and VirtualBox, neither needed. Also, on terminal client virsh you can do much more configurations than just with virt-manager.
Remember that Desktop and Server editions are very different in terms of stability. Ubuntu has got to be one of the, if not the, most widely used linux distros for servers, that’s where the money is really in for them, so it’s more deeply tested before release to the public at large, but in my experience, in the last decade or so, Ubuntu is painfully lacking on too many fronts in it’s desktop versions.
My only issue with qemu is that folder sharing is not a great experience with windows guests. Other than that Ive had a great experience, especially using it with aqemu
For just two VM, any Linux distro is enough, virt-manager to easily run those VMs up and done. The default network will allow them to communicate between their NAT. Proxmox sounds too many complications for just some testing or development stuff.
Other posters are right in that KVM is the same on just about every distro. Proxmox comes with extra tools for management and I think that makes it especially well suited.
linux
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.