I, uh, use Kubuntu LTS (--minimal-install, so no snap).
Are *buntu flavors risky for my workstation? Should I be considering Fedora?
ITT - "I DISAGREE WITH THE FACTUAL ACCURACY OF THE SETUP AND/OR PUNCHLINE OF YOUR JOKE."
Don't forget SUSE's focus on SAP... Which is also Germany I guess
When you run OpenSUSE, you can feel it was made by Germans.
The installer is a beautiful example of German engineering.
The package manager is a perfect example of German over-engineering.
If you run it with KDE, you have 2 redundant GUI admin tools for every config in the system, and 4 for setting up printers.
Yeah that sounds like a typical BMW engine layout.
It's amazing how OpenSUSE got my laptop's valve covers to leak oil.
As the owner of many old German cars this is funny but only because it means no one read the technical manual that came with the car
Hey the BMW engine that had 2 redundant everything was pretty awesome because half the engine could die and it'd keep going as an inline 6. It was 2 of everything. ECU, Distributor, even fuel pumps and rails
Sees "Germany"
Die Kommentarspalte dieser Pfostierung befindet sich ab sofort im Besitz der Bundesrepublik Deutschland meine Kameraden!
Ich bevorzuge:
π―ππππ πΆπππππππππππππππ πππ πππ π°πππππππ πππ ππππππππππππππ π―ππππππππππ
Falsches s, 7/10
Danke fΓΌr dies handbuch
I think I've put fedora on at least 4 personal systems and it has never caused an issue. It's so smooth it's boring in the best way. Switched to it for daily computing about 4 years ago. I use a minipc as a media server with Arch and turning it on it's exciting. Just this fucking morning the default configuration decided that my main audio device was a microphone. Lovely. So flexible.
I eventually landed on Fedora too. Its level of "it just works" is amazing.
Right!? Almost everything I need is one dnf command away with minimal setup on my part.
Nixos: everything everywhere all at once
Good for you there wasn't an "ease of use" or "intuitive" field.
I'm still a Linux noob all things considered, and I've been using NixOS for six months or more.
It is HARD, but I see the true value of it. I will never need to reinstall Linux because I broke it, that's simply impossible.
If I ever need to migrate my system, it's all backed up to github. With a single
Bash update.sh
every single .config file backed up, system upgraded, all packages updated.
I just love Nix, it's the perfect OS for me.
Now I just need to learn how to use flakes...
Sidebar: I've never asked before, but maybe someone can help me out. If I install a flake of an application, am I supposed to add it to the existing flake, or can I modulate flakes?
I've noticed when installing the nixvim flake it generates a new flake and it runs when I issue the
nix run ~/.dotfiles/nixvim/flake.nix
command, but I don't want to have to run that command every time. I feel like making a fish abbreviation isn't the correct way of doing this.
So I've only been using nix about a year and only used flakes. I use in two ways.
First, I have my main nix flake. Most everything is controlled from that. It has several outputs from full blown nixos builds per host or some home manager builds for non-nixos systems.
Third-party flakes I use as inputs to my own flake then use the override system to inject them into nixpkgs. Then I just install whatever like normal from nixpkgs. I can either override an existing pkg (neovim nightly replaces regular neovim for me), or you can just add as a new package to nixpkgs by using a different attribute name.
Second way is for projects with their own repo. I'll add a project flake that has a devshell with direnv so as soon as I enter that directory it sets up a sort of virtual environment just for that project. You can add outputs to it so others can use as a third-party flake.
My main starting point was https://github.com/Misterio77/nix-config for this design.
I'll never stop hating that debian is labeled stable. I'm fully aware that they are using the definition of stable that simply means not updating constantly but the problem is that people conflate that with stability as in unbreaking. Except it's the exact opposite in my experience, I've had apt absolutely obliterate debian systems way too often. Vs pacman on arxh seems to be exceptionally good at avoiding that. Sure the updated package itself could potentially have a bug or cause a problem but I can't think of any instance where the actual process of updating itself is what eviscerated the system like with apt and dpkg.
And even in the event of an update going catastrophically wrong to the point that the system is inoperable I can simply chroot in use a statically built binary pacman and in a oneliner command reinstall ALL native packages in one go which I've never had not fix a borked system from interrupted update or needing a rollback
They really should have used the word "static" instead of stable. Stable definitely has connotations of functional stability, and unstable of functional instability.
Average Grandaddy Stable distro hater
You are maybe conflating stability with convenience.
"Why is this stable version of my OS unstable when I update and or install new packages...."
The entire OS falling down randomly on every distribution during normal OS background operations was always an issue or worry, and old Debbie Stables was meant to help make linux feel reliable for production server use, and it has done a decent job at it.
FWIW I've got a Debian server that hosts most of my sites and primary DNS server, that's been running since Etch (4.0, 2007ish). I've upgraded it over the years, switched from a dedicated server to OpenVZ to KVM, and it's still running today on Bookworm. No major issues with upgrades.
depends on workload. Debian has very old packages and can be insecure but it is a set it and forget it type of thing, it is good when uptime is critical for a server. For desktops, or servers that need better security, but can tolerate a little downtime, rolling releases are good too, if you are enough to update frequently, and you should, since updates usually contain a lot of patched vulrenabilities
To me the issue is the people calling a system stable because it is reliable, even if it updates unpredictably to changing functionality.
From my experience of Fedora: would you like to update today? Debian: You're good bro, no updates today.
5, years, later..
Debian: You're good bro, no updates today.
Terminal, Terminal, Terminal, German Terminal
Console, Console, Console, Konsole
Konsole must be a KDE app, but since KDE is a German project...
I mean, I'm on Debian and I'm on the same install instance I've had for almost four years now. I'm constantly reading about how some of you people keep hosing your other distros with a normal update...
Lol, I ran 5 years on arch without a break.
Now 6 months of Bazzite without a break.
I think the age of distros shipping severely broken updated is over. And it was always, ALWAYS grub that broke after an update on mint and opensuse 10 years ago for me.
I would have put OpenBSD in "focus on security". Or hell The only prebuild thing their is pain, pain and suffering
BSD isn't linux. Or am I mistaken?
I actually run OpenBSD on one of my ThinkPads, but I was only including Linux distros in this.
Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
sudo in Windows.Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't fork-bomb your computer.