Debian (Testing), Stretch is easier to work with than stable, and I never encountered a problem groundbreaking or something a tiny hair fracture. Stretch is the perfect, when it become stable I would definitely change.
i3, on a small 12 inch laptop and I need to the screen real estate
Why do you like GNOME? I've always thought it looked ugly.
Because it's functions just like I would have designed. Back when compiz effects were big, I hid my taskbar and just used "expose windows" bound to a mouse button, and a quicksilver clone to launch programs. That's all I've ever needed.
Add the ShellTile extension, and I get tile layers too. I love it.
I also like how they've moved to designing around CSD headerbars. That and a decent theme will save you lots of vertical space.
The gnome project is far from perfect. I hate how they act like the only software you'll ever be running is core gnome apps. Similarly I hate how they pretend there's only one use case for everything. The gnome team has always been stubborn, going back to "spatial nautilus." But gnome3 has always fit my workflow perfectly.
I'm pleased it fits the bill for somebody, unfortunately not my cuppa tea. My primary preference is WindowMaker although that sometimes gets swapped with i3 depending on my current state of perversion. I run multiple different hardware platforms with corresponding different OS's for different tasks rather than dual booting. My linux systems aren't really at the moment my 'home base' but more of a resort for working on certain niche tasks. When I'm running Linux on a daily basis on my primary machine I tend to prefer MATE.
On the subject of MATE and back to the subject of Distro's I used to run Mint; but after that bullsoykaf where their site got hacked and compromised disk images got uploaded with the MD5 hashes on their website changed (with the subsequent underwhelming response from the Mint admins on the subject) I've gone back to Debian.
Running Arch on a Intel Celeron N3060 with 4GB of ram.
Works very nicely, running mate as my DE, I like it a lot.
Running Arch in a Dell with i3-gaps as my main WM. I do dabble in others such as spectrwm and blackbox, and did manage to get LainWM working in a very unstable state at some point :).
currently running debian testing with an XFCE and openbox DE. I've been with debian since I was on crunchbang, then I upgraded to testing after the crunchbang project ended. I guess I never saw a reason to switch.
lainWM, huh>last updated 2003
are there any attempts to reboot this project?
Lets make a Lainux distro then
I came up with "Lainux" name in it's previous thread and is property trademark of lainchan.org now.
We'll call it Lainux.jp.
OpenBSD > FreeBSD > Windows > GNU/Linux as for usability. GNU/Linux doesn't even come with a compiler in the default install, in most distros.
As someone that have never used OpenBSD, why are you putting it before FreeBSD in terms of usability?
The phrase ``it just werkz'' more aptly describes OpenBSD than FreeBSD. FreeBSD makes a lot of choices that don't make sense and often take more steps to get things to work right. FreeBSD does have better documentation though.
But for examples for things that don't work:
Both Chromium and Firefox
When you install Chromium on OpenBSD, it just works. You can run it. On FreeBSD you have to manually change some settings for it to work.
Even worse, for Firefox. Install it on OpenBSD, it just works. Install it on FreeBSD and you get told dbus isn't there when you try to run it. The package manager nor Firefox tell you how to fix this, and you have to go googling and manually enable it, just to run Firefox.
And this sort of stuff is normal on FreeBSD. You do something, and then things don't work and you have to google random stuff to find out why. Also:https://vez.mrsk.me/freebsd-defaults.txt
This was written by the OpenBSD committer who told me about Serial Experiments Lain. It shows some of the odd choices FreeBSD devs make. FreeBSD devs care a lot about big corporations using their stuff and in some ways try to appease corporations, unlike OpenBSD devs.
Ah, one note though. No Nvidia drivers for OpenBSD. I have soykaf graphics and it's painful. I wish computer hardware was open-source.
Thanks for the answer lainon. I was messing with FreeBSD recently and got that dbus error too, and solved by googling, so you have a good point. I found the documentation of FreeBSD to be good, but here and there things were not exactly up to date in the handbook, so I had to google too.
I have a spare laptop I was going to use for FreeBSD, I am just waiting for a different wireless card that I ordered since the one installed doesn't have drivers. I guess I'll try OpenBSD too and see how it goes. The laptop has radeon graphics, which was well supported by FreeBSD, I wonder if it works with OpenBSD too.
Good read about FreeBSD's security problem. I'm trying OpenBSD right now and it's pretty comfy. I need to read more about day to day administration still. How is Free's documentation better though? Everything I've searched for has been laid out in the FAQ and man pages. Does it get better than that?
lainux was my idea moron
You should've tried OpenBSD then, since OpenBSD developers actually use their OS as a desktop. Most FreeBSD devs use Mac OS X and just use FreeBSD on servers.>>79
I personally gained a lot from reading FreeBSD's Handbook, since it's so big. OpenBSD's FAQ is useful, but small.
Along with all the web documentation for the four major BSDs, and their man pages, I recommend two other resources for becoming a unix master:
Unix Power Toolshttp://www.bsdcertification.org/certification/bsda-certification-requirements-document-2015
The second one is just a list of stuff to learn, but it's great. I got the cert, and the journey to getting that cert was useful.
join baot starbow
Debian stretch, for the next few days, until the Atheros wi-fi card gets shipped to me and I'll get Trisquel; and Arch on another computer.
I don't like debian, actually. I am currently using debian for the second time, this time testing instead of stable, and it is less irritating when there are actually some packages in the repository that are not antique, but it's still irritating.
I have been using GNU+Linux for only a year, I'm still in the exploring phase, so there's still plenty of hopping going on. I reluctantly admit that Fedora with Cinnamon was quite comfy as a first distro. Ubuntu was my first distro in the strict sense, but I've refused to use it on the very same day. It's kooky, or at least, the default environment is. If I recall correctly, it was at the time of the creepy all-in-one search thing, I hope they sorted it out. Actually, it was so traumatizing that I've abandoned the idea of using GNU+Linux for a few years entirely. The same goes for ElementaryOS - I've installed it for my mother and checked it out beforehand, but turns out she had similar thoughts - she demanded her Windows 8 back. Sad. In retrospect, I actually think that a less kooky environment could have had a better chance of succeeding. For a distro aimed at regular users, it relies on keyboard shortcuts pretty heavily.
Arch is pretty nice. I've gotten a nice first impression of void, but I couldn't get some things set up properly and I couldn't afford the time to delve into it at that moment, so I've just went with Arch, which I was already acquainted with at the time.
Usually, I've used xfce, but I'm going to check out i3wm with Trisquel. I don't get creative with modifying it. At first I thought that I would. Actually, the end result of what I do doesn't differ that much from default setup. I am definitely going to get into ricing with i3, because these desktop threads make me so jealous.
On the other computer, on which I need proprietary drivers, I will probably try again void at some time in the future, and someday I'll definitely get acquainted with Gentoo - I am sold on the whole anti-systemd thing.
To be honest, so far I don't see too much of significant differences between distros that I've tried out. I mean, they are there, but majority of them is cosmetic. The most important difference among those that I've tried out is how much useless, irritating things that you didn't ask for do you get out of the box; that and the installation, or rather, a lack of installator with Arch. I was putting off trying Arch because I was scared of doing it myself, turns out it's not a big deal.
I don't get all the fuss about distros, especially the major ones by popularity - they are very similar in experience and are made of the same components. Meanwhile, when you aren't a linux user, you see there's so much fuss about different distros, and you think it's this big issue, as if distros were different operating systems. It's not as much about the distro, it's what you do with it.>>4
If I may ask, what exactly do you find that Arch is lacking in comparison with Manjaro?>>6
You can put your own ascii artwork there, you know.
I should have guessed that blackheim browses lainchan and lainchan.jp
I spend more tim in Kali than anything. I'm working through a textbook on penetration testing using Kali, so it makes sense I'm always in it.
Before that I was using elementary. That was a nice OS.
Debian. Been using it since Woody. I have a vague idea how it works, and starting from a minimal ISO I can change to unstable, bring down the packages I want, and keep it relatively light.
Considering a lot of portables and ARM's are running debian or debian forked OS's and it just keeps things really consistent. I did use to fuark around with Mint linux and in the dark old days Ubuntu before it (last decade) but now I just stick to Debian.
The boxes I administer at work are all based off of CentOS however so I've had to spend some time learning how to dance to Redhat's tune. I don't mind it now but I get pissy every time I try to run anything from the camp of Redhat on my own machines.
Fedora 25. I distrohopped a bit after getting a new laptop (Zenbook UX330UA), and it's one of the distros that requires absolutely no post-install configuration to fully support all hardware. Everything except for the fingerprint reader works flawlessly out-of-the-box (and I have no interest in trying to get that to work).
I'm not sure I'm a fan of Gnome 3, but I'm not a hater either. I'm going to give it an honest try for another few months to see if it fits my needs.
Upload your wallpaper please? That looks rad as fuck.
I wonder: any reason why you chose GNOME rather than Lumina or cwm? Also, just noting, you should never name your account or computer name something that you need to blur out. I usually use the names of animals or touhou characters. But I see: another csh user. Have fun!
Isn't it always a good idea to hide identifiers, in principle? I black mine out when I post, just because it's easy a soykafty extension or app might leak my username, and that could be fed into trackers to create a profile.
Isn't this a GNU/Linux thread?
But yeah, I use OpenBSD, but FreeBSD lately due to graphics issues.
I'm using Gnome on my work computer too (CentOS), it's what I'm used to. I also need Japanese input support through ibus, and on Gnome it just works™.
Truth is I could probably save some memory and have a lighter and faster system without Gnome, but as I get older I am finding it more difficult to justify trying new things that might mess up with my productivity. Gnome is so comfy.>>148
If you use ssh on your machine it's probably not wise to have your username floating around too, I use key authentication but just in case.
I think the BSDs could be considered cousins of Linux, for the purposes of threads like this.
how is freebsd on-desktop? i use it for hosting, but haven't ever tried a graphical install.
>>152>I'm using Gnome on my work computer too (CentOS), it's what I'm used to. I also need Japanese input support through ibus, and on Gnome it just works™.
Ah, I see. Makes sense. I dislike GNOME 3 since even things like alt-tab are entirely broken and unproductive.>>158
It works well. I prefer OpenBSD's default userland install a little more, but FreeBSD, graphically, works just fine. All the graphical programs I've installed have worked. I vastly prefer both OpenBSD and FreeBSD over any GNU/Linux distro I've tried. I haven't used NetBSD and dragonfly enough to rate them, though. Only so much time to experiment with other OSes.
Though, Firefox and Chromium both have post-install issues on FreeBSD (not OpenBSD) related to package management and defaults.
It's well-known that OpenBSD developers use OpenBSD as their desktop, unlike many FreeBSD devs with FreeBSD. But FreeBSD does have more support from closed-source software/firmware/hardware producers, so it has Nvidia drivers.
Try both, and pick what you prefer, and what works best for you.
I've never used GNOME or KDE before, but as 152-san says, it works for him.
I use Ubuntu, mainly because it is the only OS besides RedHat that supports official AMD GPU drivers, and doesn't black screen on me upon restart of the drivers.
My comrade! I installed a few weeks ago. I'm currently using dwm and surf from suckless.org
what have you installed on yours?
I installed i3 gaps and emacs. It's pretty nice.
I use linux mint 18.1 with amdgpu-pro drivers running smoothly. Its not difficult to get the amdgpu-pro running on a non ubuntu system with a few edits and in the right order. Recently I got my rift DK1 working with a blender plugin that I found and I am working on getting a leap motion control working better. I do 3d modeling for fun.
I started using linux because I was working a helpdesk job and the other techs were using openmediavault for plex setups. I set my own up but was more interested in the backend stuff. From there I played with VMware, then citrix zen server for a while, experimenting with the setup the whole time. Win10 had been announced around this time and I was already sick of M$ and when they had announced how patching was going to be done I had decided it was time to switch up my daily driver.
Anyone into playing around with X11?
>>325>Anyone into playing around with X11?
;u; If I could be using wayland rn, I would be. Xorg works, but it's so goddam big. It's all the more palpable when you
pacman -S xorg
because you get to see the thirty trillion dependencies it has.
>>325>Anyone into playing around with X11?
Not yet but soon. I've been meaning to give libpurple a Xaw client so I don't have to use Pidgin, a GTK client.
Manjaro with i3 is pretty scwhay.
I've had probably the worst history of distro hopping.
Started on mint, to archbang, manjaro, antergos, debian, ubuntu, arch, debian stretch, sid, elementary, I've done it all (mainly), but…
Been settled on Funtoo for a while. Fresh install, but I haven't had any other distros installed as a daily driver since last august.
What can I say? Good, smooth experience, a lot of soykaf to tinker with, and a nice community if you get stuck.
Compiling is a meme.
While it does have a soykafload dependencies, a lot of them are fonts and other such reasources. If you look at them, most of them don't exceed a few kBytes.
The main concern people have with xorg, to the extent of my knowledge, is spaghettification and the fact that it runs as root and interacts directly with drivers instead of doing it through the kernel.
I don't know much about wayland, is it really that good, or is it just "a xorg replacement"? I mean, if all it has to offer is "is not xorg", it's not much of an improvement.
I don't care if it's a RedHat project, but it'd be nice if it weren't a linux-specific solution.
I don't see the point in making software that is not a kernel component to be specific for just one kernel. Now if it does somehow rely on specific kernel features that would make it unfeasible on other kernels I would understand it, but I don't think it need be the case here.
I understand, for example, that the framebuffer device only works on linux because, after all, it's a device driver, which is a component of the kernel.
Lastly, does wayland rely on systemd? Being a RedHat project I am thinking that'd be the case but maybe they did something right for a change.
I use crux.
well. once upon a time, I was sitting in a dentist office and I said to myself that I should install crux and use it as my main distro. personal speculation suggests that I discovered crux while looking for source based distri who were not gentoo, or based on gentoo. Smgl seemed less friendly than crux. So I went with crux. It has not bothered me so much that I have quit yet.
I have been moving away from Xorg for a while. This has mostly been meaning retiring to the tty when X is not needed, and only having X on one of the machines that I use. When I do use gui, I use ratpoison, with sxhkd to make the keybinds better, the latter being a recent addition.
I like that ratpoison is very small and easy to set up. After using dynamic and manual tiling wm's I have found that I have a preference for manual, though I tend to run most things in full screen. I have not moved to stumpwm, (ratpoison's lisp based sequal), on account of laziness and comfort.
I spent a long time on :
because I was new and worried about being confused if I left
because I did not have the ability to install new OS without spending money, and it worked
Because BSD borked and my flashdrive had porteus installed (it also happened to break so I could not write to it, hence why I stayed with porteus for a few months)
What's the state of AMD drivers right now anyways? I know that they used to be pretty bad, but have been retooled.
I'm pretty excited to see AMD putting up a fight again, and was considering building a tower soon.
Never heard of crux. I am actually about to install smgl since it looks quite decent.
I actually did it once but I didn't want to bother with configuring the kernel at that point to get the wireless drivers working. Else I just use OpenBSD where I don't need to configure the drivers because it doesn't have drivers for my WNIC anyway :-)
I'd be more curious about the open-source drivers than the official ones.
I am trying to remember exactly what lead me to opt for crux over smgl, 'less friendly' is a poor critique.
On some reflection I feel like it may have been related to the exact design of the installation image; when I was debating between the two I was unable to make install discs, and ended up using a rather convoluted scheme using several chroots and mounted ISO's. Crux's install environment was pretty intuitive to assemble manually, which made that rather easy.
That's a poor reason to keep using it now that I have more options. I'll give smgl another look.
So I'm wondering about going from my current Parabola install to Devuan. Let me explain why:
1. systemd is cancer
2. I still need that fully free FSF cred
3. Damn who knew having an Arch-based distro would be hard
4. My X11 is broken and I give up already
good idea? bad idea? better options?
If it's broken, fix it.
To answer the question: Arch + Archstrike repo.
Why? Benefits of Arch, with all the convenience of having a lot of security oriented tools available and ready to work.
PS: Manjaro is pure soykaf and their dev are incompetent, opt out for Antergos instead.
What's wrong with Manjaro?
wow ok almost cut myself on your edge there
Sorry I can't be as epic 133t hax0r as you but maybe I don't have the chops for Parabola.
You didn't address 1, and your answer to 4 was incredibly condescending. Arigatou gozaimasu, sensei.
I hate Debian, but it does work. I imagine Trisquel and gNewSense will also work, as they are Debianoids.>systemd
Why is systemd bad? I'm unfamiliar as I mostly use BSDs, not GNU/Linux. I want to understand. But people never tell me about what was in use before systemd, so I don't know what to compare systemd to.
As a BSD user you should be familiar with the concept of 'do one thing well'.
Now imagine a replacement for init that tries to do everything.
>>520>But people never tell me about what was in use before systemd
many things, due to the nature of linuks, where the core components are the linux kernel and GNU glibc, the lacking ingredient always was PID 1. So each distro made it's own, usually in the form of shell scripts. This caused irregularities in software as popularity grew.
But systemd defenders use sysinitv as a strawman, while in reality there have been much better alternatives for a while already.
Why not Gentoo without systemd?
too pressed for time to compile a kernel. If you read my original post you'll also find that I wasn't patient enough to use something as complex as Parabola.
Compiling a kernel takes at most 20 mintues of menuconfig and 1 hour of compiling on a -j1
But I agree that Gentoo is a very lengthy and convoluted process. Looking at the crux install instructions this becomes apparent.
Crux isn't very big. This is on one hand nice; it isnt difficult to learn all of the distro specific tools. On the other hand, the official ports selection is rather limited, (using user contributed ports expands the selection greatly, while also adding the frustration of dealing with incomplete dependency lists, out dated ports, et cetera), not that it isnt a really nice resource, but its not always reliable (the official ports tend to be well maintained, in my experience.
Compared to my experience with arch, for example, I feel like updates here are a bit rough, and I've had to tinker around with some things to make sure that its all up and running.
The ports tools are nice though, but are probably a bit weird to first look at if you're used to downloading packages from the distro's mirrors.
Documentation wise, I haven't found problems with the man pages. I seldom look at the wiki, though it has useful information to figure out quirks, how to install and configure things in reasonable ways.
I havent used Slack, bsd a bit though. There are some similarities, but it is still decidedly linux like in my opinion.
Just installed crux and I am amazed. I said in >>545
, installing Gentoo is a very lengthy process, and I used to think that much work was necessary.
I am absolutely pleased with crux. The process was straightforward and quick. I loved the fact that the install process has a dialog for selecting the packages to install. And it comes with a bunch of useful stuff from vim to firefox.
I distrohopped for years. For a long time I settled in arch. It's simple, and the AUR was a huge plus for me. Probably the biggest reason was just the AUR. I used it with Awesome WM for the most part.
Recently I have settled back into my starting place, Ubuntu. There is no other DE as polished and consistent as unity. And in Arch there were always more bugs in major DE's. Unity is very polished, it looks nice, it is perfectly consistent, and never has issues for me in Ubuntu. I just want that these days. Maybe some day I will get jealous of cool desktops and go back to arch, who knows.
Antergos minimal (faster partitioning and base system than pure arch ) than i install KDE and programs that i use
I'm considering moving back to Ubuntu for 17.10 now that they've abandoned all these divergent projects. It really seems like it may be getting back to its roots of just being an easy to maintain distro. I left initially because I felt like canonical was trying to fork off into its own ecosystem, and I wanted no part of that.
I've been on Manjaro for a couple years, and it's been easy and stable, but the small team and repeated security flubs have put me off. Plus it'd be nice to be back on Ubuntu because so many companies package for it, and you don't have to wait for someone in the community to repackage things.
My main desktop is running Fedora, I have a raspberry pi beowulf cluster running Alpine Linux for soykafs and giggles, I have few servers with FreeBSD and OpenBSD.
It depends, I guess. I use straight Debian for my daily driver, I keep it pretty minimal. For any kind of programming or development work, I switch to Ubuntu (packages are typically more up to date than Deb, while still feeling very 'Debian').
I'm still a little burned about all of the data collection for Amazon, so I'll probably never use Ubuntu outside of work.
I seriously don't see any reason to use a distro other than Gentoo. Portage is literally the only package manager worth more than the bytes it's compiled on.
I haven't used gentoo in like a decade, but I always found my problem was self discipline. I was too tempted fuck with my useflags and then have to rebuild world because I compiled out something I actually needed 6 months later.
Ended up scrapping it when I didn't have access to my music when I had friends over because I was in the middle of rebuilding everything.
I use fedora because it just tips
Arch (GNOME), after previously using Mint and Ubuntu. I don't understand why Mint/Ubuntu are viewed as babby's first Linux, Arch has been much easier for me, although perhaps by sheer luck of having less problems.
I use Debian. My first experience with linux was with Backtrack (Now Kali) when I was learning about pentesting. It's just a modified version of debain, so I was already comfortable with it and I rarely leave my comfort zone.
I tried Ubuntu for a while but I don't really like it much. I've set up a few ultralight versions of ubuntu on hella old computers I had lying around for family members to use in the past as well, but for the most part it's debian for me.
I plan on trying Arch at some point, I've just never gotten around to it and probably never will.
>>501>Smgl seemed less friendly than crux
I haven't used CRUX, but I skimmed through their website, and I'm not saying that CRUX isn't friendly, but Source Mage is definitely friendlier (at least when it comes to just using the package management system, I know that the CRUX build scripts are some of the simplest out there).
Software installation goes like this:
and then you're presented with a bunch of queries asking you mainly yes/no questions about features and dependencies you want to use (in many cases, you can just go with the default answers).
After you've cast a spell once, sorcery remembers your preferences, so you don't need to answer the queries again.
sorcery (the package management system) has a TUI menu (it's what you get when you type just `sorcery`) where you can change settings like parallel compilation, architecture optimization, sorcery branch, etc.
You can also install software (although it's faster to just type `cast <spell>`) and view the sorcery log from the TUI menu and some other stuff.
A source based distro really doesn't get much friendlier than that.
I like void quite well.
Right now I can only think of one actual complaint, which is that theres no 64 bit wine available and Ive yet to dedicate the time to figuring out how to do it myself.
Otherwise, its my favorite distro of the ones I've tried(ubuntu, antergos, and debian for some time, gentoo very very briefly)
would you post that cute logo?
It's nice, you should try it.
>>548http://www.lunar-linux.org/>last ISO release>October 11, 2014
Lunar is deader than door knobs
not that lunar is alive per se, but having an old iso doesnt really mean much. you can install a fully up to date arch using a 2014 iso, it doesnt really matter.
the iso provides a boot and install environment, often, essentially, a means to connect to the Net so as to download the needed files to bootstrap a system. assuming that you dont have super new hardware without drivers on a 2014 linux kernel, you probably are a-ok using an old install.
what matters is the repos on the Net. whether those are getting updated. if the last update to them is in 2014, then the project is dead.
same. Portage is the most versatile package manager on earth. imo every distro should be using it.
I am converting to the linux side this weekend, actually. Going to dual-boot Arch on my desktop and depending on how much I like that, might just use my laptop as a pure linux box.
Have you tried subgraph yet?
Wouldn't Debian use less resources than Xubuntu anyways?
No, but it sounds cool. Adding it to the list of things I'll try.>>1301
Is that so? Even better then!
I personally prefer debian and ubuntu for my servers (no DE), like the stability and noob friendliness.
I've tried various popular distros and DE's at home and never really got into anything in particular. My go to for a vm is debian and if I'm livebooting something then either debian or ubuntu.
I've considered running linux on my netbooks full-time but I was never really satisfied with the numerous distros I tried, due to various driver issues and little inconveniences, I might find something light weight and functional that works flawlessly on my netbooks one day.>>1302
I'd recommend playing around with debian sid with xfce to see how you like it, if you don't need really up to date packages then regular jessie stable is nice
I've been using void for a few years straight now. I started using it because it doesn't use systemd, but I stayed because of everything great about it.
I love that it is not a fork first off, which means that if the NSA wants to figure out a way to mess with it, they have to jump through numerous hoops to do so for a very small crowd of people. If you look at recent leaks they almost always try to create things which effect things upstream in the distro-forking hierarchy so that they can nab as much downstream with tools as they can. Void breaks this cycle by using so many nonstandard things like runit or xbps, or I have my distro setup with musl instead of gcc.
Other distros that provide this security through obscurity angle, or do everything themselves from scratch without forking anything only ever amount to toys. Most of the time you can't do anything really useful with them because they are so stripped down and featureless. Void on the otherhand is basically a real operating system.
If Qubes wasn't based on Fedora I would use that.
Postan from w3m, I'm using Debian stretch on a spare hard drive and OSX (hackintosh) on my SSD.
>>1190>imo every distro should be using it
then there would be no more than one distro
currently using elementaryOS 0.4
just werks, makes me look like a hipster. what else do i need?
honestly i have been thinking of switching to gentoo or arch or something, i think im ready(tm)
any words of advice for me?
Install Funtoo with the debian-sources and go from there. Arch is meh and Gentoo is a bit too hard because of the kernel compilation (using genkernel with the default settings is useless anyhow). After you get Funtoo running with the debian kernel (this shouldn't difficult) you can tweak the kernel yourself. Get yourself the SystemRescueCD as the boot media and keep it on a disc for future use, it's incredibly quick when it comes to fixing the bootloader or kernel config.
t. tried to install gentoo five times before getting it right.
It's a fucking hellhole for new users with i686/i586 CPUs that may
support this or that instruction etc etc. Also with a 32bit machine you can easily make mistakes, and also with UEFI/Legacy booting you can have mistakes if you aren't double-checking everything. Therefore go with Funtoo and slowly dip yourself in the liquid of transcendence a.k.a gentoo wiki
ps. avoid systemd and use alsa and openrc. I can't even get systemd distros to install on my main rig (debian, manjaro, barely got NixOS, etc) there's something about the installers on those things that fuck everything up, I know it's just my hardware but please, this shouldn't be happening with system "the future" d. Alsa and OpenRC will always be there for you.
I used Arch Linux for 2 years. A week ago I got nostalgic and installed Debian, I'm in testing and everything works well :)
How big of a cluster do you have to quickly distcc your way out of each update of libroffice or firefox? Do you employs freelances on upworks to maintain your system remotly?
More seriously, Funtoo & Gentoo on paper are like the ideal distributions for me, but in practice it took me only several months each time to go back on binarie based distros for the same reason : It's too time-consuming to maintain it. I talk about a typical desktop usage here. I got bashed hard last time I gave this feedback, and I'm not a noob linux user but quite frankly my some of my experience with it sounds exactly like those /g/-tier memes about Arch-users spending more time fixing their systems than to use it. It was often down to compile time tbh,
The gentoo wiki is god-tier though, and I'm not safe from falling from the meme again once I'll get my Thinkpad. I want things to "just werk" but all in all even distro like Debian and Ubuntu need a lot of tweakings to fit my use, so I'll rather use something like Gentoo or Void to not get systemd or pulseaudio in the way. And a proper documentation to rely on.
if you choose arch, follow the wiki, not some random youtube video or something.
it's pretty easy if you just follow the instructions.
That's because the recommended iso is the lastest testing release from 2016 http://ftp.su.se/pub/mirrors/lunar-linux.org/lunar/testing/
It's super easy to get an install up and running as it's basically a more user friendly source mage. I've tried to use it several times but it never stuck because it's package manager (based on the same code base as SMGL's Sorcery, but they all split from each other around 2003-ish) has no way to resolve circular dependencies otuside of manual intervention. It also has an even smaller dev team then SMGL (17 SMGL devs http://sourcemage.org/Developers
compared to Lunar's 11 https://github.com/orgs/lunar-linux/people
) and uses systemd. It's a solid choice and probably the easiest source based distro to use period, while sharing some features with SMGL (A TUI package manager frontend, etc).
have been using opensuse tumbleweed upon a suggestion from a friend,
Gets most of the latest versions of things / kernels since it's rolling (especially with the packman [sic] repo) like Arch
but also very stable with less package manager breakage and weird forks
Crux as a solid base (including non-free soykaf my laptop needs) for Guix as package manager.
Right now I'm using Ubuntu. I originally started out with MATE as my DE (I really hate Unity), but for the past few weeks I've switched up the window manager to i3-gaps and am steadily changing other parts of my system.
I've been using Ubuntu for maybe two years now? I started off with Fedora 22 and fell in love, but a botched update or something ruined my install. Afterwards came Linux Mint which I liked, but after their main forum was compromised I sort-of lost faith in them and went to Ubuntu. It's been Ubuntu from then on. It's been pretty reliable for me; I can get most software I want whenever I want and I haven't had a major issue luckily aside from maybe battery life? But that issue is mostly due to my laptop being pretty old and soykafty.
I might play around with Debian at some point, though.
I'm using Antergos with bspwm as my window manager. Runs fine for my use case.
tbh I am pretty ignorant about the differences between distros and just went with an Arch based one as they are easily customizble and the arch wiki is an excellent resource.
Thinking about changing due to systemd however, any siggestions? Mostly just web browsing and using networking/security applications as I am doing some study in that area.
Every single distro has the exact samething under the hood. The major differences is the package manager like Arch. The rest is most likely to be debian base.
As for Systemd, there is a certain amount of option, but for Desktop use i recommend Void it's similar to Arch. I'm still going to throw my opinion out there, systemd isn't as bad as most people make it look like.
systemd has some bugs and feature creep, sure, but as someone who doesn't really care it makes it super simple to do certain things, and its the new standard anyways, so much easier to find support for
>>1470>exact same thing under the hood.
this strikes me as a mite simplistic. there are some salient differences between major…distri .
debian, by default, is fairly bloated. Even the net install done as minimal as you reasonably can do it has a lot of things running around in the background versus, say, crux, as well as just a lot more extraneous software installed.
as far as systemd, it is, as others have noted not neccisarily meaningfully different; its a program, it does certain things that need doing, you either use it or something else. nevertheless its a salient difference. Some distros like debian and arch have it by default (both those also have means to use things other than systemd, last I checked, though admittedly sometimes they seem to randomly install it along with other packages.
Some other distros still include systemd as an option (gentoo is the only one I know immediately), but dont really force it on the user. >>1469
the main advice I would have, is if you want to avoid systemd, and like arch, try arch sans systemd (this page might be of use: https://systemd-free.org/
), or void ( voidlinux.eu ). Void feels very arch like to me.
Other differences between distros: package managers are, of course, but the obvious corollary to that is that repos are different. using arch's repos is quite different than debians, and is even more different from crux. Different distros have different policies about how soon to move updates onto users. These all can be circumvented, of course, but it really changes how your system feels if you are building everything from git, versus running off of versions several years behind, albeit with security patches.
I recently got bored with my Mint install. It was all a bit boring, though certainly comfy. I've done Ubuntu, Arch and a couple others but none of them were really what I was looking for and by that, I suppose, I mean the DE wasn't what I was looking for. I use Windows 10 for my gaming machine, so for my laptop I was after something which made it useful as a laptop, not as a desktop. I found the Mint Cinnamon I was running earlier was very heavily mouse dependent, which of course means suffering through the mousepad I have on the laptop. So I wanted a more streamline, almost mac-like experience, I suppose. I want my laptop for word processing and web browsing for 90% of the time.
So I came across PureOS which seemed cool, but it could never build the boot partition properly and would never boot. Next I tried Solus, but the full disk encryption wouldn't allow me to type in the password. So I could never boot up.
Finally I tried ElementaryOS which I really like. It's simple, elegant, uncomplicated and does everything I want it to do without clutter. I get to say I use Linux and look like a Mac hipster at the same time. After a little customization and familiarization with keyboard shortcuts I know I won't be changing any time soon. Plus it feels nice being part of an ever developing program, even if I can't setup my VPN yet.
But I'm a simple man, I see a desktop environment I like, I install that distro/DE. The rest is all fairly meaningless to me, I use whatever OS or distro I need for the applications I need.
isn't it no longer being updated?
What do you guys use for tiling wm's? I've tried i3 and awesomewm and they're pretty nice. I'm currently using a script for openbox called pytyle that works decently well, I like openbox a lot anyways, so it was nice to find a script that tiles windows for it.
I have now for most of my time as a nixist been using the lovely window manager: ratpoison. It works pretty reliably, its very quick and painless to install, I like the configuration, its not often updated.
Why do people hate systemd so much?
IMHO runit > systemd > openrc
>>1755>why do people hate systemd
'Systemd's centralized design philosophy, more than technical concerns, indicates a dangerous general trend toward uniformizing the Linux ecosystem, alienating and marginalizing parts of the open-source community, and leaving little room for alternative projects.', its design is a result of "enormous egos who firmly believe they can do no wrong". "Its design goals "[are] prone to mission creep and software bloat." (quotes grabbed and tweaked from the wiki article, it gives a good summary).
It has google dns servers hardcoded into it as defaults, and the lead dev thinks this is cool. it has bugs that allow certain types of users to simply use root powers. It has strange and annoying defaults, it makes doing some simple tasks difficult or near impossible, it tries to take over other programs and duplicates their behavior. its bloated and full of feature creep, and it seems to have no end in sight.
I linked three articles, each of whom has many other links to more places of criticism. I dont necessarily want to convince you that it is bad, but I am sure you can at least grasp why people find it troubling.
Simply that it does too much stuff, counter to unix philosophy
>Pacman combined with AUR has all the packages one can wish for.
I'm not an Arch user but this is the best thing about the distro for sure. If you want to be up to date all the time then it can't be beat.
i don't like using the aur for everything though.
a lot of packages other distros have are only in the aur for us.
though I havent used wine much, I've heard good things about wine on deepin, and it also seems generally just to be doing a fairly solid shot at a newb distro.
It has some questionable reports on privacy though.
Otherwise, though its been memed a lot, arch has been pretty solid when I've used it. If you need something setup fast and easy, probably some archbased thing would work (antegros comes to mind).
Arch linux with i3 for desktop/laptop
Alpine, Debian, or CentOS for server
I also have a x86 laptop (Thinkpad R60) running Alpine
Although for servers I usually use BSD/OmniOS which are Unix's
Deepin looks really, really nice to be honest. My concern was it being made in china so I went and did some browsing and came across this videohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v25Dy66AtNI
Where the guy describes an unusual connection to a chinese web analytic collection site. But they refuted the claim officially on their website herehttps://bbs.deepin.org/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=155331
I reall like ElementaryOS (pic related) which is a comfy "Ubuntu for idiots" operating system that I think is very aesthetically pleasing. Definitely worth a look.https://elementary.io/
Note that on the download page it says "pay what you want" if you enter $0 in the custom field you can download it for free. If you enjoy at though, it'd be nice to chuck them a couple bucks
It gets down to who you trust, and if you care.
The statement gives me the impression thet they are indeed collecting some information through cnzz. They say its anonymous and so they can make things better, but almost assuredly if they are getting some
data back, among that data will be the source IP. There arent too many deepin users, and so it might be easy to individually track users by that data sent back, and the source IP.
The data thus collected might be able to help an entity track your actions online, and possibly generally guess your movement routine if its on a mobile machine.
Nevertheless, I am not sure if anyone is alleging that this is that much more than you might give to sites already.
It gets down to whether you trust the developers, and whether you trust them to not backdoor things, and to respect your privacy. The criticisms leveled by that youtube guy are probably less about "this is really bad" as, "I dont think this is something someone who respects my privacy would do"–its not what they're doing,–its that doing it reduces user trust.
In all odds, it seems like its probably fine, the data they definitly collected sounds mostly innocuous, and like things they maybe would collect with some legitimate use. Further, I dont know about you but I might honestly be more worried about chinese spying, if I were in china. But if you're paranoid, it might not be worth it.
been running void linux on my x220 for about a month now
next im trying gentoo on my old as soykaf T60 that I swapped the mainboard for a T61's, ssd, 8gb ram, and a T9500 cpu.
Gonna be using it to transcribe my notes and stuff. I'm also building a new pc, don't know what i'll put on it.
This strikes me as peculiar, but perhaps it is I who have peculiar policiy.
Generally, simply, I've liked to setup all my machines on a single distro. Its much easier if I can distribute packages that way, and scripts and everything in the same organization.
Do other alices have highly hetrogenous personal nets ?
linux mint xfce on my x230
As for "why".. Well, it is an ubuntu distro that is a bit more user-friendly than ubuntu itself. Being a very popula-r distro it is very easy to find answers to nearly anything by just googling.
Like with dosbox today: it used to crash with segfault. Instead of spending a lot of time i googled. Someone on some forum said it is fixed in svn version of dosbox. Then, instead of downloading source and compiling it myself i just found a PPA with dosbox-daily in it. Whole thing took me 10 minutes and I can play my heroes2 again.
Well also my level of linux hackery is enough to make ubuntu useful for work, but not enough to build my own linux from scratch (which I honestly don't need) and f with it.
i settled with opensuse tumbleed. great distro and great integration of kde.
Throwing in. I really hate systemd and I can't respect anyone professionally if they like it. BSD-init is simpler than systemd and can't fault it at all. If you can't follow shell scripts, you're incompetent.
Fucking hate that I have to deal with it at work. Like trying to eat a steak with a spoon.
I use Void
+Not bleeding edge
-Project head is MIA
-Wiki is just a clone of the arch wiki
But Ubuntu is for idiots.
>>60>GNU/Linux doesn't even come with a compiler in the default install
But that's not how an OS works or makes it bad/worse. Also simply not true in most distributions.
Gentoo here for productive work, OpenBSD and also Gentoo for server, Windows for the last few games you can't get around with, even on Wine or Console.
I use manjaro i3. Same thing, i don't want to install arch for now. I tried manjaro because of /r/unixporn
>>60>needing a compiler for usability
honestly most desktop users aren't gonna need a compiler out of the box when packages are distributed as binaries. I'm gonna guess you mean gcc, but this also applies for javac/g++/clang/etc.
I'd also argue there's no sense including interpreters by default for scripting languages not used in other default packages (ruby/python2/python3/etc).
No sense in growing the attack surface any more than you need to.
Ubuntu LTS. I'm not even using it for the usual /cyb/ reasons, but because it keeps me away from certain games, a command line comes in handy at times, the repo and snap has everything I use, and less corporate policy forced on me. Every other distro feels less polished or is hostile to proprietary stuff like discord/steam.
wellcome from lainchan
Also how do u get the lambda in your prompt?
probably just add it in PS1
XMonad is my favorite WM,
also lambda in promt it just "theme" for zsh shell
interesting, i have xmonad but haven't figured out how to use it yet.
>probably just add it in PS1
i actually did just that :p but for some reason it no display in urxvt but it does in terminator and i honestly don't know why.
Arch. It's given me a better understanding of Linux and I'm considering leaving Windows for good now. I'm using KDE currently mostly just because I like how it looks, but I might try out something like i3 at somepoint.
anyone have this wallpaper?
just a google search away
I understand that's scary for some, tho.https://i.imgur.com/6P08OXx.png
this could be an issue of font support.
I know that it sooo late, but I shift from arch to debian 1 month ago I guss.
what do you use right now
I was using BunsenLabs Linux (a descendant of CrunchBang), a good out of the box experience, but now that I'm more comfy with how Linux works under the hood I use Debian Stable with Openbox which is pretty much what BunsenLabs is.
Used to be Manjaro but since they dropped OpenRC support I'm a sucker for Artix.
inb4 AUR is for plebs that can't get soykaf done themselves
Has anyone heard of Deft?
I just stumbled upon it while looking for the definition of "deft".http://www.deftlinux.net/
Posted too soon.
It is made for computer forensics and the website is all tight and neat but i'm curious about the quality of the system itself.
devuan netinstall with dwm but that's only to try out guixsd in qemu (only been in tty consoles so far so no wm yet)
Graphical installation with encryption never worked for me, but that turned out to be a plus as it forced me to learn how to install from the terminal with chroot. Since then I've installed twice more, and I understand my systems much better than I would otherwise.
I've had pretty few problems with Artix once I got things set up. Definitely would recommend.
Running Pure OS
It is a pretty solid distro, debian based
Suppose I use it more for the fact I like the developer and his ideals
Wanted to test out the OS before deciding to buy it's phone
No control only yours
Ubuntu (it just werks) and i3 (all hail minimalism and ricing)
Qubes. I don't know if I'll stick with it long term, but it's pretty interesting. Feels comfy knowing that I've got some serious armour on.
i wish i could use qubes but my new hardware won't boot to it (Dell Inspirion 15) (It won't boot to tails either)
Yeah, Qubes is funky that way. I do notice a pretty major hit to battery life as well. Boot time is also very high. I'm on a pretty decent machine (i7-7500U, 16GB RAM, 512GB M2 SSD) and it's still chugging in normal operation. I'll probably go back to Debian stable and rely on dm-crypt and careful browsing habits for day-to-day use. But I'm glad I tried Qubes. Very interesting concept.
Most of the things that would otherwise make dual-booting with Windows necessary work painlessly, sometimes out of the box. It's not great on the privacy-bloatfree-libredom stack, but I always found those things to be just vanities of the here-and-now carpe diem real world that boring people care about.
If you're not good with computer, why going with these hard distribution? If you're not good I recommend you Debian only if you have a little bit more older hardware. Ubuntu if more recent. Now if you wanna go in danger zone go with Manjaro or Antergos.
I assume they want somewhat of a "trial by fire." By using a difficult distribution, they will be forced to learn more.
I've tried i3 but I didn't really like it. However, I'm still interested in wm's. What should I try next? bspwm? awesome? dwm? riced KDE?
>>2154>bspwm? awesome? dwm?
if you didn't like i3 then you won't like any of these either i suspect.
what didn't you like about i3 anyway?
Hey, could you play share your config for GuixSD?
>>2155>if you dont like i3 you dont like any bare window manager
There are plenty of very different window managers from i3. Personally I'm not a huge fan of i3, but I use stumpwm and find it plenty different in good ways.>>2154
what didnt you like about i3 ? personally I'd suggest trying other substantially different ones, stumpwm is sort of like tmux, openbox is very mouse centric, dwm is sort of weird in my experience but some people like it. wmutils is cool if you're into that.
Its a big world out there.
I just didn't like the mechanics of i3's window spawning. I have a high-PPI display and i3's feature of taking up the entire screen upon first open of a terminal window, and splitting it in half etc. didn't sit well with me. Also it was not intuitive where new windows appear and how to move windows around. I want a keyboard-controlled DE but I don't want it to be so stubborn. It would also be nice if I could change window focus without having to move my mouse, also.
yeah I get that. i like stumpwm in part from that it handles this differently, splits are done manually, which just seems a much easier way to control stuff.
>fullscreen by default
not sure if there's many wms which dont do this, openbox comes to mind, but again its ubermouse centric. you could also probably setup some defaults with at least some wms to make them start in a smaller window, but not sure how I'd start that though
One alternative might also be to use a DE (or even openbox) with something like sxhkd, for handling keyboard inputs and turning them into useful wm commands.
read the docs?
window movement, placement, changing focus, etc. are covered at length. don't like the opening layout? then you can change it. you can assign a default geometry (size) to an application in all instances or individually but this defeats the purpose of a tiling wm.
May lambda be with you,
I just want to know, Does it use alot of RAM or it is another program, I tried NIXOS and it use alot of ram for a distro and it was fk my processor while updating
Nice. KDE - forever!
We’ve all heard that joke before, this isn’t /g/.
Suckless/BSD autism is the only way to use unix without it being a clusterfuck imo.
Just, configure soykaf as you need it to work once and try to forget it exists, sweep all the complex tooling under the rug.
I recommend the plan9 shell(rc), on that note. Seriously, try it, its the best shell Ive ever tried.
As for distros I use linux sans systemd.
Mostly distros don't really matter, its just preconfigurations. linux is linux is linux is almost UNIX.
Debian on the Laptop, Gentoo on the Desktop.
I need to be able for things to "just work", on the move. And since I'm currently (almost finished) driving 1000 miles to a new home, I need to not wait around on compile time.
Awesome! KDE - forever!
Devuan has a version of tails called heads. No systemd
You can totally gaymes on Linux now.
I'm currently running Arch + KDE on my computer and Arch + i3wm on my laptop.
I use i3wm because I really don't like using the touchpad. KDE is fancy and faster than GNOME.
Arch was the only distro that worked with me, I've tried Debian, Ubuntu, Deepin, Manjaro, Antergos so far. Not planning on moving.>>2380
Wow, that gave me some nostalgia. Nice interface, anon.
Antargos. It's an Arch-based rolling distro, as easy to set up as Mint can be.
Antergos* as, I realise, several lainons talked about before me. Anyway, so far so good in my case.>>2382
It would be a good joke if it wasn't so insulting
Yes, I have been using Arch primarily for 4 years now. My initial Linux experience was in highschool where I ran Ubuntu, but couldn't get into it because at the time the DE didn't automatically put shortcuts to my newly installed apps in the start menu or anywhere I could conveniently find them. Also the game selection of Snakes and other basic games didn't impress me. In college I tried Mint Linux 10, but when I updated to Mint 11 my samba didn't work out of the box and I wasn't familiar enough with the system or terminal to even know what samba was or to make sure it was installed or enabled and gave up after that for a few years. Then when I started looking into Linux again I found Arch Linux which required you to build it from the ground up. I knew it would give me the opportunity to learn about Linux and familiarize myself with the terminal. The installation guide and wikis told me everything I needed to know. And I had even set it up as a Luks on LVM which is where I had issues installing it since grub wasn't loading lvm and I had to figure out and troubleshoot why. After that I struggled to get xorg to work with my amd drivers. At that time they were still the catalyst drivers. Anyways, learning to use Arch Linux has forced me to learn how to identify what services aren't working and to look into the logs or configs to fix issues. Now I can do most anything I need from memory.
Now I run Arch Linux as a KVM/QEMU hypervisor and do gpu passthrough to a Win10 gaming vm with my Vega 64 and have dedicated 8 gigs of hugepages just to the one vm along with 8 threads of my Ryzen 7 1800x. My Firestrike results are only about 1000 less in a vm compared to native and you can't really see the graphics difference anyway. The only issue I am facing which may be fixable by updating my linux-vfio kernel or through some other system or container tweaks is that the win10 1803 and 1809 builds won't work. I couldn't update to it because when the system rebooted it couldn't complete the installation. It just gave boot errors. Also the boot media wouldn't boot in QEMU even though it would natively. And my research lead to determining that QEMU knows there's an issue with the recent windows 10 builds. There are some work arounds that I haven['t dicked around with yet, but for now I have build 1151 as a vm and 1809 as a native boot. The main reason is that Xbox Live doesn't work completely in the lower build. The Live store is blocked so I couldn't download or run State of Decay 2. Also steam games such as Chrono Cross and amnesia don't work on build 1151 and Chrono Cross used to work before Enix updated it. So until I can get the recent build to work in QEMU I am stuck dual booting. And sorry for drifting off into Windows, but that is my present Linux virtualization and main battlestation. And of course I plan to set up many other vms in other distros and a SteamOS so taht I can compare it to gaming on Windows.
So I was looking for lesbian linux which doesn't seem to be active, and I stumbled upon Tinkerbell Linux developed by Paris Hilton. I sort of want to pop both of these bad bitch distros into a vm along with a Pony Linux image and see what these puppies can do.http://www.bbspot.com/News/2006/08/paris-hilton-tinkerbell-linux.html
At this point I'm practically married to Qubes. For what it does it's fast and incredibly stable. Running multiple VPN-routed VMs is a breeze, it really holds your hand for practicing good opsec, and an added benefit to the isolation is you can test/break things without breaking your entire system. The huge downside is you pretty much have to build a system for the purpose of running Qubes. Thankfully my previous build was able to run it giving me a good enough idea to commit.
What are the most stable distros without systemd? I want something to install, configure and forget about it. I don't want to spend time maintaining my system anymore.
What I have used daily for more than a month in the last couple of years:
Good but the installer is a soykafshow. I am not able to install it on a EFI system with a manual partition layout.
I like it but the package manager is a mess if you have to compile things. Slackbuilds are too hacky and they are sometimes only compatible with a certain branch (current/14.x).
Don't want to spend a couple of hours each month updating my system. But you can have whatever you want in your system, there are no compromises.
I have yet to try a BSD distro and GuixSD. Don't know if there are other distros with an active dev team/community.
If I don't find anything better, I guess I will try Devuan or something else with systemd (Devuan, CentOS…) but I'm trying to avoid that monstrosity.
I'm using Tails right now with a USB stick but doesn't feel like a permanent solution.
I need Windows installed because gf, there is no way I can convince to stop playing popular vidya games. That's what I use 90% of the time and it doesn't feel right*.
You can run OpenBSD like that given you don't need linux specific software (like docker, yak).
I have high hopes for Guix in getting a piece of mind with the software zoo, though haven't tried it myself.
Could you share the colorscheme please?
you could use a color picker to grab it from the fetch screenshot
I use Awesome/Void Linux.
I've always wondered if there was a way to change that
I am a linux noob so I installed noobuntu. I plan on installing debian some time later.
Xubuntu and XFCE fluxbox is my favorite DE window manager
It's just a bash script, you can modify it how ever you want; i wouldn't think any other program depends on it.
It even has helpful comments saying what it's doing and how to change it.
Check it awt.
Copland OS - Mac OS?
What does the Arch?
manjaro i3 community for me
Damn thats quite a lovely look there, please tell me about it, I gotta try it out
I would love to have a easy way to configure I3 and not have to mess with thing all the time. Like Antergos but easy to use.
From what I understand, AMD open sourced their own drivers
I love tilling windows manager, but i get so much problem because i want my tray icon to work correctly and it just doesn't and having a good looking taskbar is also taking so much time to config.
I just use Linux Mint. I'm pretty new to linux, and I wanted something that was comfy and easy to troubleshoot.
I grew up with windows, and it wasn't until a friend helped me install fedora onto my laptop. I found it neat, but I had driver issues that were more frustrating to troubleshoot than it seemed worth (serious graphics card issues making the laptop unusable). So, it was back to Windows.
Then, I tried to do a clean wipe of windows off my laptop (to start fresh), and Acer tried to cuck me out of $80. Basically, even though I had the windows key, I had to pay Acer for a disk to flash windows back onto my laptop. I promptly said "fuck you" and switched to Linux. I did use Windows 10 once I got a desktop, cause "for teh gaymes", but I hated it so much I quickly switched back to Mint. Not much of a gamer grill anyway.
Since then, I've been using mint and tbh I like it a lot. Reading this thread, people are talking about some hack on their site, and I don't know anything about that. But I've been thinking of making a switch to something else. From this thread, maybe debian.
Better buckle up, Debian is really good in terms of security but it's also a real pain in the ass.
Is it easy enough to install? I can set up a partition for experimentation, something I've been wanting to do anyway
>>2715>Better buckle up, Debian is really good in terms of security but it's also a real pain in the ass.
Keeping all packages on 2-3 year old versions is good for "stability" but definitely not security. All bugs that are silently fixed without CVE drama don't get fixed in Debian so you're vulnerable to a lot of soykaf.
Well, I would say no, but it's depend if you use free driver or not. Since they don't give it in the installer the option to go with non free driver which mean you have to download Wifi driver, graphics card drivers etc on another usb to install during the installation. It's really is a pain in the ass. Even Arch is so much more simple then Debian on so much stuff.
I hear you, and i agree. I just see Debian as the Firefox ESR of linux Distro. I love it for that.
If i can recommend you a Distro that i used for my work and personal computer. Anarchy linux. It's a text base installer for Arch.