It’s rather bold of many of the commenters in this thread to assume they know the needs of Mozilla and their developers rather than those people themselves. GitHub makes complete sense, even if it doesn’t live up to some people’s desires for free software purity.
The thinkpad yogas (at least the models i worked with) work just fine with Linux (Except maybe the fingerprint reader but i never bothered to get it working).
When you need a software recommendation for handwriting/annotating then i strongly recommend xournal++. Imho the best there is and i prefer it over any windows application (onenote sucks balls). Have used it for 5-6 years now.
I have a 2-in-1 Lenovo Yoga 6 13" that I’ve installed Linux on. I’ve given up on the fingerprint reader working. The part manufacturer doesnt make drivers for Linux nor do they provide the necessary information for someone to make one themselves.
I use a thinkpad x1 yoga 4th gen with Ubuntu 23.10. Works great. Palm rejection has given me a couple problems, but only sometimes… I have not had time to troubleshoot yet though. I tried xournal++ first but was very unhappy, then tried the snap version of onenote which was much worse and landed on Rnote. Rnote is great!
I hope am not too late for this. If you’re looking for a consolized PC experience with Steam and all of its quality of life features, check out ChimeraOS.
It is based on SteamOS3 and adds a lot of extra features such as GOG and EGS integrations and built in emulators.
It also has a desktop mode for a full featured Linux experience. Keep in mind it’s an immutable distro.
Also, it uses Arch btw. Sorry just wanted to say it for such a long time now 🤣
I’m amazed people are still using Mercurial. I worked on a few hg projects about a decade ago and it wasn’t a very good experience. It was easy for people who used subversion, but if you were even halfway familiar with git you just missed a lot of functionality.
I found it preferable when I started exclusively using the keyboard and keybinds. Tho I ended up using a TWM so I’m definitely not the target audience lol.
We really need to all stop promoting Fedora especially after what Red Hat did to the Community with CentOS and closing the code off from downstream.
Fedora is Red Hat in disguise.
Same goes for Canonical. They’ve decided to screw the Community and try force things on users, Communist style, so they can f right off too!
We should all only use 100% Community based distros and projects because they need our support and break their backs working for the Community.
For example Linux Mint, Debian, Arch, Slackware and others.
If you use Mint like I do, switch to Debian Edition and let the developers know that’s where you prefer that focus first and then do the Ubuntu edition afterwards 👍
That’s why we should stop using them. If they have zero users, they’ll eventually stop the Fedora project and the Community can keep pace with Debian or openSuse. openSuse can easily step into Fedora and Red Hat’s shoes.
OpenSuse is not going to break new ground. It’s all about OBS and testing software before it hits their Paid Enterprise offerings. And they have almost a fully automated procedure for this. OpenSuse is not going to push Wayland only nor what will become the standard. It’s not in their ethos. OpenSuse is there to build SLE’s next release.
Debian being cutting edge?! Never. Debian is Debian, very slow to adopt anything. Debian is about offering a very stable release schedule. Debian will never push the ecosystem forward, it’s not Debian’s goal. You want a reliable system that just works? Debian is inarguably the king.
Agree 100%. And both are 100% Community. openSuse is privately owned and supported by a massive Community.
Debian is perfect for reliability (although opensuse is very reliable) who don’t need the latest and don’t like installing updates all the time. 100% Community based.
Two fantastic, shining examples of the power of Community supported software 💪
You need to understand that Red Hat/Fedora regards the Linux Community as “free loaders”. That’s how they designed described anyone wanting access to Red Hat Server source code.
That’s what they think of you and me and all the great developers who make a lot of the software we use, often in their free time and at no cost.
Most of the distros and software you use on Linux is made and maintained by people who are not paid but do it for the love of Libre open source freedom loving computing for all.
That is the FOSS way. Red Hat/Fedora do not share this view. They see us all as free loaders.
If all the great Devs who contribute so much to GNU/Linux had that attitude, you’d literally have no free distro or apps.
That means no poor third world person would ever have access to an operating system or pc. Only us well off people in the developed world. That’s anti FOSS.
Don’t support ass hats like Red Hat/Fedora who stand against that.
And now we see Canonical also being ass hats but only by including telemetry in Ubuntu, but forcing snaps on end users, blocking flatpak out of the box (you can still install it yourself but newbies won’t know this) and they are aiming to eventually make Ubuntu snap only. Not to mention they worked with Microsoft to make “Linux subsystem for Windows” which is a real insult to Linux and FOSS.
Use Debian and other Community based distros which have zero corporate funding or involvement and are 100% by the people for the people
First of all you’ve swallowed the myth that Fedora users are beta testing for Enterprise software. That said discouraging people from voluntarily beta testing is bad for the community and fundamentally against the spirit of open source.
As a long-time Fedora user I think Red Hat’s backing is good for Fedora because it means they have a solid source of funding. Apart from the resources that gives them, that way they can be entirely user-centric and not be tempted to sell user data, run ads or anything else against the users’ interests.
There’s a lot of hearsay going on around Red Hat at the moment, some of it has grains of truth, some of it has been distorted beyond fact, I’m sorry that you’re a victim of it.
Beta testing is great. Just not when it’s for Red Hat(Fedora), Canonical, Microsoft (WSL) or any other Greedy Corp. when they are requesting this in the spirit of open source.
Not how open source works, you don’t get to choose who benefits from it, it’s for anyone who wants to use it. Ubuntu is downstream of Debian is it not?
Well Red Hat put up a paywall so that only those who they choose, can get the code. That’s the issue. Then they justified it by calling users who want the code “free loaders”. That’s typical proprietary speak, it has no place in open source.
Ubuntu is downstream of Debian. But canonical have taken it, forced snaps on users, forced opt out telemetry in users and removed default flatpak support. All very user hostile moves.
Hence I’m calling the community to show these corps we don’t need them and community distros have everything we need while protecting user freedom.
Remember what I said about hearsay? Everything in Fedora is FOSS, everything in RHEL is also FOSS (because it’s in CentOS Stream). All the code is released, not behind a “paywall”. All that Red Hat have done is make it more difficult for companies to sell a 1:1 “bug for bug compatible” RHEL clone - those are the “free loaders” being spoken of and who they’re targeting, not the Linux community, it’s people like Oracle (who incidentally are also the ones fanning the flames of this drama).
I’m no fan of Canonical, but even with your description you’re really sensationalising things there as well. The point is by supporting Debian you’re inadvertently supporting Canonical - I don’t think that’s a problem myself but it seems you have double standards.
I would like to quote for you from Gnu.org, Richard Stallman’s organization that invented the idea of free software. Here he explains what that means. I’ll link to the full webpage below.
“Actually, we encourage people who redistribute free software to charge as much as they wish or can.** If a license does not permit users to make copies and sell them, it is a nonfree license.** If this seems surprising to you, please read on.
The word “free” has two legitimate general meanings; it can refer either to freedom or to price. When we speak of “free software,” we’re talking about freedom, not price. (Think of “free speech,” not “free beer.”) Specifically, it means that a user is free to run the program, study and change the program, and redistribute the program with or without changes.”
Why would this be a good thing at all? One of the main goals of the ecosystem is to have multiple choices, and as others in this thread has mentioned, Fedoras made significant progress for the adoption of Linux as a whole
Because you’d be helping Community distros get better, as well as financially, instead of supporting corporations that use you as beta testers to improve their paid corporate product and then screw you over when you want access to the server code.
I still don’t see how having the choice is a bad thing. If you don’t like Red Hats position, then don’t use Fedora. For those that believe using Fedora will help better the Open Source ecosystem, they have the ability to do so.
Getting rid of a choice completely because you don’t agree with a position in a nuanced conversation seems childish
I’m not saying it will be banned, you can still use it but I’m calling the community to return to community distros like Debian who are 100% libre and user freedom respecting… Plus there many dedicated developers and other volunteers who support this out of love for FOSS and the principles of free computing for all.
That’s not childish. It’s a call to get back to our roots. Use Community distros, volunteer your time if you have the skills they need, make a money donation to thank them and help the project keep going. That’s how FOSS is supposed to work.
Fedora is community based and “independent” from RedHat.
In the past, they often actively decided against RHs interests and will continue doing that in the future.
Independend in " because RH puts lots of dev power and $ into the Fedora Project, and loosing that would hurt.
It’s a symbiotic relationship: RH provides money and developers, while we as users test for new technologies that will get used for RHEL in the future.
The increased ressources provides us with more (also financial) security. Still, if RH somehow decides to abandon Fedora, it will still continue to live on, see Project uBlue as example.
Also, calling everything you dislike “communist” is just dumb, there are way better words for that… Either, you use communism in the terms of “totalitarian government” like Stalin was, which is just… unfitting (Holodomor, etc.); or you don’t get that promoting community based distros is more socialist than you realize.
Just say “I don’t like stuff forced on me from corporations like Canonical” and don’t use Ubuntu and thereof. Nobody hinders you in using what you want, and that’s great!
The reaction is funny too, because in my experience comparing communities of various distros, Fedora’s community is among the the most inviting and professionally-behaving of them.
Personally, I am not running Fedora at the moment, but probably will when my Framework 16 arrives, since Fedora is officially supported on it. And to be honest, I find that I am making the same choices with Arch as Fedora would have made for me (aside from bootloader), so I feel that I’m wasting a bit of effort.
Keyboard centricity is a bonus to me. I don’t like having visible UI elements that don’t do anything for me (docks, task bars). I also dislike the trend of programs not closing when I close them (system trays).
In addition to these things, I value a degree of minimalism, and I’m a heavy user of virtual desktops.
I don’t need to cope with any of these potential downsides, as they’re not downsides to me in the first place. All of this said, the KDE community seems a lot more welcoming. I tend to suggest KDE Plasma for any people trying out Linux.
Hope this helps 👍
EDIT: I almost forgot to mention the most controversial one of them all. I love single click to open.
As others have mentioned, the sequential speeds in RAID 0/5 won’t really help you in gaming. What you might see at best is faster loading times, but that’s really about it.
One option which no one else has mentioned is using setting up tiered storage using bcachefs - where your SSD acts like a cache drive, which would contain frequently read aka “hot” data, and the rest of the data would be on your spinning disks. This way, you’d be making the most of your limited SSD space, whilst still taking advantage of the large storage provided by the spinning disks.
The advantage of bcachefs is that all your drives can be part of the same pool and it’ll all be transparent to your OS/programs, and all your data is striped like a RAID 10 array, so you can replace your drives in the future without any issues, or any major config changes. Like if you get a faster NVMe drive in the future, you can set that as your “hot” (promote) drive, your SSD as the foreground drive and your spinning disk pool as the background ones and your data will automagically migrate.
The main drawback right now (for you) is that it’s not yet part of the kernel. The good news is that it’s gonna be in the next kernel (6.7), so you can either wait for it, or use a third-party kernel with bcachefs already compiled in it (I believe linux-tkg is one of them).
I think I need to change my plan abit. What do you think: if I buy 2x1TB, use my sata ssd as foreground, and use 128gb nvme drive as promote drive. I still do not understand the difference between background, foreground, ans promote tho. I went back and forth both reading the guide.pdf and archwiki. Still have no idea how they actually work. It’s bleeding edge, as no one beside the developer talking about it on youtube.
However, I think I’m gonna use both linux-tkg linux-git as they are available on the aur. Tkg is the Garuda used, no? It is on chaotic-aur, so I assumed so.
Foreground targets are where writes initially go. Data is moved from foreground to background targets while idle or as needed. Data which is read from the background targets is moved to promote targets.
If you set your NVMe as a promote target, SSD as foreground and your HDDs as background targets, all writes would first go to your SSD, then get copied to your HDD during idle, and finally the copy of the data on your SSD will then be marked as a cached copy. In case your SSD becomes full, then it’ll store the data on other drives. As for the promote targets, any time you read data from either the SSD or HDD that wasn’t on the NVMe, it would get cached to it, so the next read will be faster.
The main point of the foreground vs promote is to prioritize write vs read speeds. If you value faster writes, then set your NVMe as foreground. If you value faster reads, then set your NVMe as promote. Of course, you can also set your NVMe as both foreground and promote to benefit from both faster reads and writes.
But since you plan to introduce an SSD in the mix, you can create a single group for your NVMe + SSD, and a second group for the HDDs, and set your SSD group to foreground + promote, which will simplify things.
If you’re concerned about chucking both the SSD and NVMe in the same group, no need to worry cause bcachefs will automatically prioritize reads from drives with lower latency as mentioned in the wiki.
If they are different speeds, reads for replicated data will be sent to the ones with the lowest IO latency.
But regardless of which setup you go for, main thing to remember is to use the NVMe (or the group containing the NVMe) as the promote target, as that will be your primary cache drive.
I think I’ve been using K-9 Mail for 10+ years or something. The settings were kind of all over the place but it has always been one of the email clients with the most features.
Nearly all hardware support is kept in the kernel until and unless it bitrots to the point of unusability. I’ve had no issues with a 5.10-series kernel on my 2008 laptop, and I don’t expect any issues when I finally get around to upgrading it to 6.x (well, except the usual tedium of compiling a kernel on a machine that weak).
The difference isn’t all that noticeable, to be honest, or at least I’ve never found it so. If you’re using older hardware, you’re going to get an older “experience” anyway. The most user-visible kernel improvements tend to be improvements in hardware support, which is irrelevant if your hardware is already fully supported. However, I don’t do anything fancy with my machines—no full-disc encryption or the like. I usually don’t even need an initram to boot the system. So maybe you would notice something if your machines were more complicated.
(Note that the laptop I mentioned above started out with, um, a 3.x kernel? It gets a new one every year or so. The only kernel changes affecting it that were significant enough to draw my attention since 2008 were a fix in the support for the Broadcom wireless card it carries, and some changes to how hibernation works, which didn’t matter in the end because I basically never did try all that hard to get hibernation working on that machine.)
See I fear this, being stuck to only kernels up to a certain version. Because don’t the older ones lose support and stuff like that? how the heck do you maintain your system if the distro isn’t pushing anymore updates and such?
You’re unlikely to have issues unless an entire architecture loses support from your distro, and if you’re running x86_64, that isn’t going to happen for a long, long time. I’ve never been in a position where I couldn’t compile a new workable kernel for an existing system out of Gentoo’s repositories. The only time I’ve ever needed to put an upgrade aside for a few months involved a machine’s video card losing driver support from nvidia—I needed a few spare hours to make sure there were no issues while over to nouveau before I could install a new kernel.
Note that you can run an up-to-date userland on an older kernel, too, provided you make sensible software choices. Changes to the kernel are not supposed to break userspace—that’s meant to keep older software running on newer kernels, but it also works the other way around quite a bit of the time.
I’ve been using Mint for a few months now after initially trying Fedora and Kubuntu. Mint has been by far my favorite experience and I’ve even gotten a few people converted to Linux via Mint. Definitely my recommendation for any Linux newbies.
If the computer is modern enough that you’d consider buying it to use, I can almost guarantee that you’ll be fine to run the latest distros. I just threw Arch + KDE on a 14ish year old laptop I found, and it runs so well that I may daily drive it for a while just for the hell of it.
At worst, you may need a lighter-weight desktop environment (DE) than some of the pretty ones you see in screenshots. And those are simple to install and try out.
So then there’s really nothing special you look out for? why have I had such issues with linux issues and my Dell Xps 13 9310? user error or proprietary b.s.?
Proprietary BS, Dell has become kinda notorious for that. A lot of their stuff has weird hacky workarounds to get Linux running properly. Unfortunately there isn’t a great way to know that in advance, other than poking through wikis or asking around.
For most computers, it really isn’t much different than installing Windows. Most things will just work, maybe a few drivers to install, and you’re good to go.
Both, but consumer is generally worse. For reference, check here for issues related to yours. The instructions are geared toward Arch, but the problems affect most distros.
linux
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.