Linux
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
Maybe Fedora?
Personally, though, I’m a Debian guy - Testing on my desktop and stable with Flatpaks and a few backports on my laptop.
Sounds like you want EndeavourOS.
Installs in a few minutes to a fully configured and usable desktop environment of your choice. It is Arch ( uses the same packages, uses the same kernel, has access to the AUR ). A huge benefit of the Arch repos is the up-to-date package universe as well everything you are likely to want being in the repo or AUR.
Don’t underestimate the maintenance and reliability benefits of not having to cobble stuff together from multiple sources.
EndeavourOS was my 3rd repo and has been my go-to ever sense.
If it wasn't in the experimental stage I'd say openSUSE Slowroll.
NixOS is super easy. It gets a bit complicated when you use flakes, but you don't need to to start.
You just put the system packages into the configuration so you can replicate that system everywhere.
But if you don't care, just install everything to the user profile! It just works like any distro then, no config files to mess with
The first power spike you will experience is actually setting up a service like Jellyfin by just editing the configuration.nix, though. It's so much easier than having to mess with the configuration yourself (someone already did the work for you)
Debian Stable + flatpaks. If I were to install it again, I would probably use spiral Linux.
I've moved to cachyOS, I've been getting into running local AI, and they offer an optional prebuilt SDK.
(with Debian I would have to install CUDA myself, which would cause issues on kernel updates)
love debian stable but ive veen wanting to try kicksecure
Arch, because I use niche software and the AUR doesn't always get along with Manjaro very well (ungoogled-chromium-bin is the worst offender). Switched to arch, configured it identically to my manjaro install, and all has been well.
If you're lazy (which I take to mean you like low maintenance) and haven't tried a rolling release distro, you need to try Manjaro. It's downstream of Arch (like Mint vs Debian) but with a lot of QoL improvements that take the edge off.
It's"Goldilocks" for me because it's rolling and has recent packages but also very low maintenance. I was sick of 3rd-party repo incompatibilies and update issues on Ubuntu.
It's a curated take on Arch in that it sources packages from Arch but holds them back until they're in a decent shape. Recent example was the Plasma 6 which they've held back a couple of months until most bugs had been cleared, but normally they release packages on a 2 week cycle.
It works out of the box, keeps working indefinitely (5 years going for me), and they have integrated system snapshots if you use BTRFS for root, just in case (automatically takes snapshots before every update, which you can restore from Grub). Never had to use a snapshot (did it only once to see if it works).
Limitations of Manjaro compared to Arch:
- Not as bleeding edge due to holding packages for a while.
- You have to stick to their way of doing stuff, like their tools for graphics drivers and kernel management.
- You have to stick to a LTS kernel or at least keep one installed as backup at all times.
- It won't change your kernel major version for you, ever. Some people see this as a disadvantage, personally I greatly prefer it.
- You have to stick to their stable package repo. If you use their unstable/testing repos all bets are off (which is not going to be news to someone familiar with Debian).
- You get access to the AUR but the usual warnings apply since AUR is even wilder than Sid. Some people say they've ran into trouble installing some AUR packages on Manjaro due to missing dependencies. It's never happened to me but I can see how it could happen due to the package delay.
- You can't say "I use Arch btw". Arch fans tend to hate Manjaro because they see its limitations and hand-holding as antithetical to Arch's goals.
Regarding that last point, there's a very vocal minority that will smear Manjaro any chance they get All I can say is, try it for yourself.
I can confirm it works as advertised, has very low maintenance and good performance.
I use it for gaming with Steam, Heroic, Lutris and a bunch of emulators, web browsing, some light development and home lab.
The Manjaro team have had well publicised mistakes in the past which I think the community were right to highlight. However to be fair to them it was like a decade ago they had the PGP one, and they seem to have become a more professional outfit since then.
All distributions make mistakes. It's a complex job. Debian stable had a local root elevation exploit on for a while a couple of months ago and nobody batted an eye. People would have a field day if that happened to Manjaro.
It's a double standard borne out of the resentment of a vocal minority and that sucks. The Linux community wastes so much energy on these pointless feuds. (And then they wonder why there's never the year of the Linux desktop...) Linux and FOSS are not about treating user share as a zero sum game but unfortunately there are people who can only think in terms of "if you use another distro you're dumb and I must ridicule you".
It's an especially narrow-minded take with distros like Manjaro, which is different enough from Arch that its users were never going to use Arch anyway.
Not being able to say “I run Arch BTW” is a dealbreaker.
Great question. Right up there with "what's the best movie" or "which meal should I order". Maybe you want to ask which editor is the best too?
The good, the bad, and the ugly . Tapas or hamburger.
Hamburger? Who eats a burger without cheese? In this political climate?
The question starts with "What do you consider..."
You sound like the type to reply in threads where someone's asking about a problem they're having with Windows and say "I don't have this problem because I use Linux (snort)"
I read the question. I'm the person who's annoyed with the daily "hey guys which distro do you use" BS.
I don't have that problem because I use Windows snort
NixOS. Declarative system management is just so unbelievably simple and reliable that I couldn’t ever see myself going back to a traditional Linux system.
NixOS is too different and poorly documented for me to call it the true goldilocks distro, but man am I loving it
I’m building a batteries included desktop OS based on NixOS. A bit like ZorinOS, ChromeOS or Mint but with NixOS as a base. It’s a bit ambitious and still in an early stage, but it’s been great fun for me using the Nix package manager as a solid tool to build stuff. Check it out at https://nixup.io/ or https://github.com/nixup-io/desk-os if you’re curious. Anyone with the nix package manager installed and flakes enabled can just execute nix run github:nixup-up/desk-os to spin up a VM with a demo.
Popos for me. It's my daily driver.
OpenSUSE Tumbleweed.
Up to date and stable. Best of both worlds.
For me it's either OpenSUSE Tumbleweed or Arch and I can never decide which. Tumbleweed having snapper and YaST everything out of the box is amazing but sometimes I miss the AUR, and Zypper is so much slower than Pacman. I also really like Fedora Silverblue on my laptop but I don't think I could use it on my main system.