Any distro should do it, you just need to set your media centre software to run at startup. I’ve done it with Plex and Kodi, and I think Jellyfin does it too :)
You are. Reformat and install the first hardware compatible distro you find on distro.moe right now. Don’t think too much about it, just do it! /s, probably?
If checking out a different distro sounds interesting and/or fun then you should. If not, then don’t. Whatever way you Linux is the correct way for you.
Piggy backing to ask how one could play video from streaming services such as Netflix, Hulu, etc in full HD under such a setup? My assumptions are that videos would be played in a web browser, and most if not all streaming services like Netflix limit video playback to 720p in a web browser, although I’d love to be wrong about that.
There is a browser extension called “Netflix 1080p”, but in my experience the quality isn’t the same as Netflix’s native 1080p - the quality with the extension is visibly lower (but still better than 720p). And of course, it can’t do 4K at all. It also occasionally breaks, which is annoying.
If you really want to play streaming services at full quality, it’s better to just get a streaming stick like a Fire TV Stick, or a Roku or similar.
I’ve been using a htpc for TV content for years, and I’ve finally given up and just gonna pirate all my shit now. The hoops I’ve had to jump through to get 1080p on Linux, and Netflix/prime video working on my rooted lineageos phone has pissed me off too much. Researching all the *arr software packages and which sources to get content from, this weekend.
However, be aware that adding third party repositories may cause problems in the future. For example, if you upgrade to a version of Mint that’s based on 22.04 or 24.04, the updater may throw errors or even do an incomplete update because of broken dependency chains.
If the software you’re using doesn’t depend on (a specific version of) software in the Mint repositories, you should be fine and it shouldn’t matter. I myself have a few external repositories that I know from experience cause no dependency issues. I’ve also had to debug plenty of broken upgrades because of other (popular!) repositories, though.
You may want to use a tool like Distrobox instead. Binaries running inside Distrobox have close to zero overhead. GPU acceleration can be a bit trickier, but for Nvidia GPUs there are workarounds to maintain full performance.
You can also try the version of ROS that Ubuntu packages. It’s not the latest version, but it’s guaranteed to work without breaking your software updates or operating system upgrades in the long term.
May not qualify as “simple” versus a VM, but you can try using chroot environment. You essentially run minimal Ubuntu environment from a folder that can be a newer or old version of the host OS.
If your use cases (a.k.a. requirements) are met by your current distro, never switch.
If you are satisfied with stability, availability of support, quick availability of security patches, never switch.
This is particularly important when you are using your Linux desktop as your daily driver.
Most you can do is to check what additional features other distros are offering (rolling release, hardened/zen kernel, x86-64-v2/3 support, file system type, user base, availability of packages, package formats, overall documentation etc.), validate if you really need those features.
If you are interested or just curious to test those features, install that distro on a VM (QEMU/KVM) to try it out first safely. Use it on VM for a while, make yourself comfortable with it. Once you are satisfied with it, only then switch.
This suggests that if you can build the ROS 1 from source, you have Flatpak and Snap as option, and maybe also AppImage.
Besides that there is also Linux KVM (QEMU) which may perform better than VirtualBox. Cannot find a good page for Ubuntu on it, but here’s the KVM entry of the excellent Arch Linux wiki wiki.archlinux.org/title/KVM
Each container, by default, runs in a separate network namespace. You can use docker CLI to create specific networks that can be shared with other containers, or use docker-compose for it. Technically, for processes outside containers you can still use the same network of that container by running the inside the network namespace of the ‘VPN’ container (for example running them with unshare). However, I wouldn’t recommend this, as containers are supposed to run mostly isolated workload and not for this kind of use-case. But yeah, technically it’s feasible.
Sounds like distrobox/ toolbx would be the easiest here. There’s an ubuntu 18.04 image here github.com/toolbx-images/images it’s like a vm without all the overhead
If you a home user with your computer or laptop inside a LAN you would not really need a firewall, unless you start to use applications which expose its ports to 0.0.0.0 rather than 127.0.0.1 (I believe Redis server software did this a few years ago) and do not trust other users or devices (smart home devices, phones, tablets, modems, switches and so on) inside your LAN.
If you are running a server with just a few services, for example ssh, smtp, https, some hosting company people I knew argue that no firewall is needed. I am not sure, my knowledge is lacking.
Application firewalls, watching also outgoing traffic :
If you compare Linux with some other Operating System you will see that on Linux for years an application firewall was non existing. But there is a choice now : opensnitch This can be useful if you run desktop applications that you do not fully trust, or want more control.
linux
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.