5 ms·

Honestly the only Linux distros worth trying are Gentoo, Arch, Fedora and RHEL/Oracle/CentOS. With anything else you are just wasting your time with amateur hou

Honestly the only Linux distros worth trying are Gentoo, Arch, Fedora and RHEL/Oracle/CentOS. With anything else you are just wasting your time with amateur hour attempts to cobble together a Windows/Mac OS competitor without a good understanding of how all the components fit together.

weakfish 7y ago
Care the back that claim up?
- bgorman 7y ago
  Sure, Ubuntu and Debian change the source code/setup of upstream packages, and generally add very little value compared to just using Gentoo/Arch/Red Hat based distros which actually use upstream components with much less touches and provide a more sane way to install your own packages, run docker container etc. In addition, Ubuntu does not do any real work pushing desktop linux forward. Ubuntu focuses its efforts on ill-advised efforts like writing its own compositor (Mir) and Desktop environment (Unity). Currently, most work to advance the Linux desktop is focused on a new project called Wayland (Used by Fedora for last few releases), yet Ubuntu has decided to double down on X11, a legacy project that clearly has no future and has issues like screen tearing that are basically impossible to fix. Another tangible example related to developers: On Fedora/Arch you can run docker containers without requiring root due to Red Hat's work pushing podman forward, however you cannot do this on Ubuntu/debian because they lag behind upstream
  - Jonnax 7y ago
    I feel like I've gone back in time to 2013 reading your comment. What was wrong with unity? Plenty of people preferred it. Also Mir was ill-advised back in 2013 and was dropped in like 2017. Wayland has been around as long and is only just becoming usable. Or are you saying that Ubuntu should have funded Wayland development? Any proof they're "doubling down" on Wayland? If Ubuntu isn't pushing desktop Linux forward. Gentoo, Arch or Fedora sure ain't. Also lol. Podman seems to be an alternative to docker. Why should I use that? Why isn't that ill-advised? Is it because Red Hat made it? What's wrong with this? https://docs.docker.com/engine/security/rootless/ https://docs.docker.com/engine/security/rootless/
    - bgorman 7y ago
      Podman is a technical superior implementation to docker. No background daemon is required to run. See details here: https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2019/02/21/podman-and-buildah-for-docker-users/ https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2019/02/21/podman-and-bui... I'm not sure what you mean by Ubuntu doubling down on Wayland. They have no plans to migrate to Wayland.
      - Jonnax 7y ago
        That article told me nothing useful. Honestly it seems like a clone of docker selling the slight advantage of root less. Which docker already does. I don't understand why I should care that it's a Daemon. In fact that blog post says that they won't go into why it's bad. Just that they do things different. In fact it seems like it's a "Not invented here" implementation from Red Hat. Searching Hacker news there's not many posts on it. Seems like it'd be as silly as using Mir to run this in production. Also on my doubling down, I misquoted you saying they're doubling down on X11. There doesn't seem to be any evidence of this. I wasted time googling it and it looks like they decided not to use Wayland by default in 20.04 because of certain bugs they didn't deep acceptable. But it comes with Wayland out of the box, and you select it on the login screen.
  - msla 7y ago
    If you choose a distro based on default GUI, I question your Linux knowledge.
  - Gregordinary 7y ago
    Lubuntu plans to support Wayland in the 20.10 release by porting Openbox to Mir, which supports Wayland. https://lubuntu.me/lubuntu-development-newsletter-9/ https://lubuntu.me/lubuntu-development-newsletter-9/
Aaronstotle 7y ago
I think having a MacOS/Windows competitor is a good start, a lot of people try a Linux distro and choose a flavor that's familiar (Linux Mint is very similar to windows for example).
Koshkin 7y ago
How is Debian different from all of those in this regard?
ebiester 7y ago
Or, we've been using Linux for a long long time and have no time for compiling from scratch, and like it or not, Ubuntu is the best tested out there for the desktop/laptop. Fedora isn't bad either, mind you. I'd never run Ubuntu on the server by choice, mind you, but servers are constrained by other considerations.
- sudosysgen 7y ago
  Since we're talking about compiling from scratch, I spend about a third of the time compiling since I've got Arch on my machine (albeit a fairly powerful Ryzen). The vast breadth of the AUR saves me a lot of time having to figure out how to compile version z of software x.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
znpy 7y ago
Meh. I see a lot of people in IT who don't directly do systems-related work (think of QA people for example). Without Ubuntu they'd be either running mac os or windows. Ubuntu lowers the bar of linux-on-desktop accessibilty by a lot. For a lot of people it's okay not to have a good understaning og how all the components fit together.
- the_af 7y ago
  Agreed, but also: it's important to know that some of the "hardcore/tunable" distros don't provide a good understanding of how components fit together either. I don't know how it is now, but many years ago it was a running joke that most Gentoo users hadn't the faintest idea of how anything worked, but felt "hardcore" because they could pass many command line flags to the build and felt they were "optimizing" their system -- actual gains were not demonstrably noticeable, but they "felt fast" -- and they had no understanding whatsoever of gcc flags for example. Experienced users had to patiently explain that no, you shouldn't pass that experimental flag to gcc or everything would break. "Hardcore" Gentoo users believed that by "installing from source" they somehow magically ended up with a faster system. No empirical evidence, of course, just a heartfelt belief compiling source code was magical. This kind of "hardcore" Gentoo users was very, very, very annoying. Users of Ubuntu were better off: they understood what they worked with regularly and didn't pretend to understand what they didn't need to understand.
  - non-entity 7y ago
    I see similar issues from a lot of Arch users tbh. There seems to be a lot of posturing of being a more advanced user, when thats not always the case. I once saw someone confidently explain that their drive device was /dev/nvme instead of /dev/sda because its an arch thing. I've tried one such "hardcore" distro once (Crux to be exact) and while it was fun for a while, I also wasted a lot of time. Nowadays, I just stick Ubuntu Flavor (am actually running Lubuntu right now) because everything works mostly out of the box. Yes, I know it has its own set of problems, but I have different priorities. I dont particularly care if I get labeled a noob for it.
- bgorman 7y ago
connorgutman 7y ago
Under no circumstance should anyone listen to this user nor should they run Gentoo or Arch on a production machine. I use Arch on my personal computer but for work I find Debian testing to be the perfect distro. Stability is a trait which matters.
- mfontani 7y ago
  Do you find debian testing to be stable enough compared to debian stable, for servers? For similar reasons (stability), I always go for the current stable (although I've a couple machines on oldoldstable, because it takes a while to upgrade...).
  - leeoniya 7y ago
    fwiw, i run debian unstable in production for 6+ years, updating every few weeks, with 0 issues. i would assume that testing should be rock solid.
- edoceo 7y ago
  I've been super happy with Gentoo in production for at least a decade. I don't see the issue? I have Gentoo on my desktop+laptop too. But, I also run loads of Debian server systems too. My worst upgrade experience has been Ubuntu systems
  - mekster 7y ago
    Does that mean, you compile updates elsewhere and load the binaries on production?
- sudosysgen 7y ago
  I run Arch Linux for work even though we're a Debian shop, and it has a great many efficiency advantages. I think in hours they are more than worth the three hours of productivity loss it would take me to repair my machine in case something bad happens. Indeed, AUR and the extreme adaptability of Arch probably saves me 2-3 hours a week.
- 7y ago

weakfish 7y ago

Care the back that claim up?

bgorman 7y ago
Sure, Ubuntu and Debian change the source code/setup of upstream packages, and generally add very little value compared to just using Gentoo/Arch/Red Hat based distros which actually use upstream components with much less touches and provide a more sane way to install your own packages, run docker container etc. In addition, Ubuntu does not do any real work pushing desktop linux forward. Ubuntu focuses its efforts on ill-advised efforts like writing its own compositor (Mir) and Desktop environment (Unity). Currently, most work to advance the Linux desktop is focused on a new project called Wayland (Used by Fedora for last few releases), yet Ubuntu has decided to double down on X11, a legacy project that clearly has no future and has issues like screen tearing that are basically impossible to fix. Another tangible example related to developers: On Fedora/Arch you can run docker containers without requiring root due to Red Hat's work pushing podman forward, however you cannot do this on Ubuntu/debian because they lag behind upstream
- Jonnax 7y ago
  I feel like I've gone back in time to 2013 reading your comment. What was wrong with unity? Plenty of people preferred it. Also Mir was ill-advised back in 2013 and was dropped in like 2017. Wayland has been around as long and is only just becoming usable. Or are you saying that Ubuntu should have funded Wayland development? Any proof they're "doubling down" on Wayland? If Ubuntu isn't pushing desktop Linux forward. Gentoo, Arch or Fedora sure ain't. Also lol. Podman seems to be an alternative to docker. Why should I use that? Why isn't that ill-advised? Is it because Red Hat made it? What's wrong with this? https://docs.docker.com/engine/security/rootless/ https://docs.docker.com/engine/security/rootless/
  - bgorman 7y ago
    Podman is a technical superior implementation to docker. No background daemon is required to run. See details here: https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2019/02/21/podman-and-buildah-for-docker-users/ https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2019/02/21/podman-and-bui... I'm not sure what you mean by Ubuntu doubling down on Wayland. They have no plans to migrate to Wayland.
    - Jonnax 7y ago
      That article told me nothing useful. Honestly it seems like a clone of docker selling the slight advantage of root less. Which docker already does. I don't understand why I should care that it's a Daemon. In fact that blog post says that they won't go into why it's bad. Just that they do things different. In fact it seems like it's a "Not invented here" implementation from Red Hat. Searching Hacker news there's not many posts on it. Seems like it'd be as silly as using Mir to run this in production. Also on my doubling down, I misquoted you saying they're doubling down on X11. There doesn't seem to be any evidence of this. I wasted time googling it and it looks like they decided not to use Wayland by default in 20.04 because of certain bugs they didn't deep acceptable. But it comes with Wayland out of the box, and you select it on the login screen.
- msla 7y ago
  If you choose a distro based on default GUI, I question your Linux knowledge.
- Gregordinary 7y ago
  Lubuntu plans to support Wayland in the 20.10 release by porting Openbox to Mir, which supports Wayland. https://lubuntu.me/lubuntu-development-newsletter-9/ https://lubuntu.me/lubuntu-development-newsletter-9/

Aaronstotle 7y ago

I think having a MacOS/Windows competitor is a good start, a lot of people try a Linux distro and choose a flavor that's familiar (Linux Mint is very similar to windows for example).

Koshkin 7y ago

How is Debian different from all of those in this regard?

ebiester 7y ago

Or, we've been using Linux for a long long time and have no time for compiling from scratch, and like it or not, Ubuntu is the best tested out there for the desktop/laptop. Fedora isn't bad either, mind you. I'd never run Ubuntu on the server by choice, mind you, but servers are constrained by other considerations.

sudosysgen 7y ago
Since we're talking about compiling from scratch, I spend about a third of the time compiling since I've got Arch on my machine (albeit a fairly powerful Ryzen). The vast breadth of the AUR saves me a lot of time having to figure out how to compile version z of software x.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

znpy 7y ago

Meh. I see a lot of people in IT who don't directly do systems-related work (think of QA people for example). Without Ubuntu they'd be either running mac os or windows. Ubuntu lowers the bar of linux-on-desktop accessibilty by a lot. For a lot of people it's okay not to have a good understaning og how all the components fit together.

the_af 7y ago
Agreed, but also: it's important to know that some of the "hardcore/tunable" distros don't provide a good understanding of how components fit together either. I don't know how it is now, but many years ago it was a running joke that most Gentoo users hadn't the faintest idea of how anything worked, but felt "hardcore" because they could pass many command line flags to the build and felt they were "optimizing" their system -- actual gains were not demonstrably noticeable, but they "felt fast" -- and they had no understanding whatsoever of gcc flags for example. Experienced users had to patiently explain that no, you shouldn't pass that experimental flag to gcc or everything would break. "Hardcore" Gentoo users believed that by "installing from source" they somehow magically ended up with a faster system. No empirical evidence, of course, just a heartfelt belief compiling source code was magical. This kind of "hardcore" Gentoo users was very, very, very annoying. Users of Ubuntu were better off: they understood what they worked with regularly and didn't pretend to understand what they didn't need to understand.
- non-entity 7y ago
  I see similar issues from a lot of Arch users tbh. There seems to be a lot of posturing of being a more advanced user, when thats not always the case. I once saw someone confidently explain that their drive device was /dev/nvme instead of /dev/sda because its an arch thing. I've tried one such "hardcore" distro once (Crux to be exact) and while it was fun for a while, I also wasted a lot of time. Nowadays, I just stick Ubuntu Flavor (am actually running Lubuntu right now) because everything works mostly out of the box. Yes, I know it has its own set of problems, but I have different priorities. I dont particularly care if I get labeled a noob for it.
bgorman 7y ago

connorgutman 7y ago

Under no circumstance should anyone listen to this user nor should they run Gentoo or Arch on a production machine. I use Arch on my personal computer but for work I find Debian testing to be the perfect distro. Stability is a trait which matters.

mfontani 7y ago
Do you find debian testing to be stable enough compared to debian stable, for servers? For similar reasons (stability), I always go for the current stable (although I've a couple machines on oldoldstable, because it takes a while to upgrade...).
- leeoniya 7y ago
  fwiw, i run debian unstable in production for 6+ years, updating every few weeks, with 0 issues. i would assume that testing should be rock solid.
edoceo 7y ago
I've been super happy with Gentoo in production for at least a decade. I don't see the issue? I have Gentoo on my desktop+laptop too. But, I also run loads of Debian server systems too. My worst upgrade experience has been Ubuntu systems
- mekster 7y ago
  Does that mean, you compile updates elsewhere and load the binaries on production?
sudosysgen 7y ago
I run Arch Linux for work even though we're a Debian shop, and it has a great many efficiency advantages. I think in hours they are more than worth the three hours of productivity loss it would take me to repair my machine in case something bad happens. Indeed, AUR and the extreme adaptability of Arch probably saves me 2-3 hours a week.
7y ago