Why would i advertise windows if i’m defending x11 you fucking retard. People who spread fud about x11 and blindly advocate for wayland are the ones who want to sabotage linux and make it unusable.
Oh, you’re conservative, that makes sense. You just want the things to stay the way they are. I mean, it’s the opposite of progress, but there are a lot of people like this.
The video is clickbait and a few of the distros are in categories just for dramatic effect. I personally share Chris’s criteria for “pointless” distros however, and I hope that his main “clickbait motive” was trying to stop people from hopping around from gimmick distro to gimmick distro when the real magic has always been with the Debian/Arch base underneath the hood. I don’t care to give Chris the attention he wants so I’d rather answer your questions instead of talk about the video directly:
I agree that Debian and Arch are “S-tier” distros. Not that they’re better than everything else for every usecase but they are very high quality community-run distros with large package bases, and they accomplish their mission statements with ease. If you’re a Linux power user for long enough you may eventually settle into one of these two distros because they give you a lot of room to mold your configuration without being opinionated by downstream distro maintainers.
Linux Mint is very good, and it’s probably the only “fork distro” that I recommend people use because it makes Debian/Ubuntu very simple and usable for new users, and it’s done so for many years with a great track record. I currently run Debian Stable but if you put a gun to my head and said “you can only run Linux Mint from now on” I’d be fine with it. Specifically, I prefer the LMDE edition but the normal version is good too.
You can run cutting-edge gaming stuff on Debian Stable and Linux Mint by using Flatpak Lutris/Steam, which uses its own cutting-edge Mesa package instead of the system’s, and you can also install a cutting-edge kernel on these stable distros by using Debian backports or e.g. XanMod. I prefer using stable distros like Debian Stable and pulling cutting-edge versions of your important packages through Flatpak or other means, which gives you a “stable base and rolling top”.
I think the general usecase for Arch has diminished from half a decade ago due to Flatpak’s popularity, and IMO a stable base setup makes more sense if you can get everything important that you need from Flatpaks. With Arch, not only are the programs you care about bleeding-edge, everything is bleeding-edge, and you may end up with annoying bugs from packages you didn’t even know existed.
If you want a more modern version of the Linux desktop without the bleeding-edge of Arch I think OpenSUSE Tumbleweed is a great cutting-edge distro. They have extensive automatic testing that ensures high system stability even while living near the edge of package freshness. The main downside is OpenSUSE’s smaller package base compared to Debian/Arch-based distros.
thanks for the explanations. I only used Ubuntu like 5 years ago and since then never again. From what i understand flatpak is a linux command to install applications. Ubuntu uses apt / apt-get (whatever the difference is there). Why does this guy shit on apt so much? I dont know whats wrong with it and why is flatpak so good?
Flatpak is like an alternative packaging system that exists outside of your distro’s normal packaging model, e.g. apt/dnf/pacman etc. The killer features are that Flatpaks work on any distro with a single universal package, and that the software versions will be cutting-edge without needing cutting-edge system dependencies. Flatpaks run in their own dependency network and generally don’t rely on anything from the host system - this means that you can have arbitrary software on your machine that your distro/repo maintainers don’t need to compile/quality-control/stability-test/etc. It also comes with an easy sandboxing framework out of the box as a bonus.
In my case I usually use Flatpaks to get more current versions of software without totally messing up Debian’s “Debian does not break” stability model - Debian is meticulously maintained so that its “Stable” branch only has ultra-stable versions of software, at the expense of those packages being older and frozen. If you use a distro with smaller package repos (e.g. OpenSUSE/Fedora/etc) you’ll probably appreciate finding Flatpak versions of software that you’d normally need to manually compile.
Flatpaks are cool, and they have a specific use. They’re not the end-all be-all of packaging and they’re (hopefully) not going to replace apt/dnf/pacman. As for why they hate apt I have no idea. apt is good, and you can even make it a little nicer by installing nala and using that instead of apt.
If the basis of this thread is that you’re digging for distro recommendations I’d personally steer you towards Linux Mint and OpenSUSE Tumbleweed for their ease of use. Debian is a little more difficult to set up than Linux Mint but not tremendously so. Arch is more of an “intermediate” difficulty distro where the main challenge is that your system packages are fast-moving and can break/change in small ways from day-to-day. If you aren’t comfortable with Linux you might get frustrated with minor bugs that you don’t know how to troubleshoot. Conversely, if you want to learn Linux then dealing with Arch’s shenanigans will help expose you to various parts of the system naturally.
Looking so forward to seeing K-9 Mail incorporate even more modern features (snooze!) and take on the new branding. It has already come a long way these past couple of years, and made my degoogling journey much easier. Would love to see an Android-based calendaring equivalent too. Shout out to cketti for all his hard work!
I have doubts you would see any performance increases, and if you change your hardware you’ll be in for a tough time but it would be a fun learning experience!
Thats a question I have. I have two laptops, a shitty amd ryzen thinkpad t495 and a fancy soon-to-be-corebooted Clevo NV41MZ with i7-11** cpu. Pretty crazy performance difference although the chassis and keyboard suck. But if I get the keyboard I want to simply swap drives, as there is nothing fancy, this should just work right?
Swapping CPU manufacturers entirely? I’d just start my kernel config fresh. Pull up the old one next to a new (default ) one and go down line by line. Odds are there are at most a few flags that would need to be changed, but it’s a good chance to reevaluate your previous decisions too.
This used to be the norm, not a weird thing that noone has thought of before. If you do this your kernel will be a lot smaller, boot faster, and be a bit more secure. Once you’re booted it won’t make any meaningful speed difference though.
It makes a HUGE difference in compile time. Which only matters if you’re building your own kernel anyway. It’s a solution for its own problem.
I think it’s a good learning experience though. There is genuinely a lot of stuff in there that you can easily, safely remove, and reading up on all the less obvious flags is fun.
Potentially related, not sure: does anyone know how I can get touchscreen scrolling working in Firefox on a fresh Ubuntu 23.10 install? Currently it’s just selecting text and it’s driving me up the proverbial wall. Googling was unsuccessful.
Not sure if Firefox supports that… For what I remember, PostmarketOS, Ubuntu touch and other mobile linux distros actually patch Firefox for allowing that behaviour
Wayland shills call everyone names but the moment anyone criticises it they call everyone they don’t like a bigot, get them cancelled and stop any discussion about the negatives of wayland. Why are they so insistent on forcing everyone to adopt an unfinished product? It’s almost like a big corporation with a hat wants to sabotage the linux desktop.
Or reference managers. I’m in academia and it’s a pain because I can’t edit anything on Linux without breaking the fine, I tried everything, LibreOffice, Only office… Nothing works.
I simply resorted to using a windows+office VM for work, back when I was exchanging office documents with coworkers a lot. Even subtle things like font rendering would be different, making a 2 page doc into a 3 pages, etc. (Rendering, not just support - mscorefonts was already installed)
IMO, the best distro is going to be whatever you’re most comfortable with (given it’s still getting updates blah blah blah). Some might be easier in the get go but if they do wonky things (compared to what you’re used to) an update might really screw you up and leave you in a situation where you’re doing a lot of research.
For the most part, you can make any distro do whatever you want, but if you understand one much better than the rest, use that.
A lot of people lately have whined that Linux people are zealoted evangelists. You sure wouldn’t know that in this thread… Most popular jist of responses is “make sure its the right tool for the job first”
While I don’t mind BSDs, that would lead to even worse outcomes though in my view. Companies wouldn’t even have to release the source code, and they routinely don’t.
What we need is more copyleft to ensure companies contribute back to the communities they leach from, not less.
linux
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.