4 ms·

One issue that always burned me with Fedora is a little configuration file. Wacom tablet support is basically gimped due to it. Everytime I use it I have to fix

One issue that always burned me with Fedora is a little configuration file. Wacom tablet support is basically gimped due to it. Everytime I use it I have to fix that, and no, it's not the wayland issue but one due to poor scroll handling. It's hard to find the fix and I tried looking into it right now. Last time I tried it was on Fedora 39, it has been there since 34. Maybe not in 40 though. I've tried plenty of distros, and sure some of it is personal preference. But still, I have often seen little issues like these be quite difficult to find solutions for. And many distros still ship insane defaults in some more niche circumstances that aren't properly tested. And many a times, those make up preferences in peoples' minds. And, arguably, they are objective reasons for doing so. Be it due to sharing many common parts with its enterprise solution, or simply because a particular guy didn't bork my drawing tablet with some config meant to circumvent GTK scroll behaviour, or because they have a platform that you can use to build and distribute packages for theirs and other(!!!) package managers (so they have good experience automating these kinds of processes)... I don't know the reason, but I've had a better time with this distribution. I just wanted to share that it is a good one.

DEADMINCE 2y ago
> One issue that always burned me with Fedora is a little configuration file. Wacom tablet support is basically gimped due to it. Everytime I use it I have to fix that, and no, it's not the wayland issue but one due to poor scroll handling. It's hard to find the fix and I tried looking into it right now. Last time I tried it was on Fedora 39, it has been there since 34. Maybe not in 40 though. Isn't Fedora the 'testing' or bleeding edge distro/project for Red Hat? Did you on RHEL Desktop? That's the only RHAT based product that should have defaults that work with those tablets, IMO. Don't you think it's likely there is some hardware out there where an OpenSUSE default causes an issue that doesn't happen in other distros? > I don't know the reason, but I've had a better time with this distribution. I just wanted to share that it is a good one. That's more than fair. I'm just so skeptical when people say $distro is so much better or more stable than all the others. Most of the time someone just had a better experience with it, rather than it being objectively better in some way. All the main distros are pretty damn stable and solved all the frustration causing issues a long, long time ago IMO.
- pxc 2y ago
  > I'm just so skeptical when people say $distro is so much better or more stable than all the others. openSUSE has a more sophisticated (and more expensive, computationally and financially) automated QA process (Open Build Service + OpenQA) than many distros, which is what has earned its rolling releases the stability that has garnered this reputation. It's perhaps also affected by the predominance of Arch in the rolling release space; it's easy to look stable compared to a distro that sees it as the user's routine duty to watch for and fix certain kinds of incompatibility problems with updates. It's true that nowadays all distros are pretty good, but there are real technical differences between openSUSE and other distros which matter. The only distro with a distinct lineage that has a package manager much like openSUSE's is Fedora, and that's because dnf has copied key zypper features. dnf and zypper handle collections of multiple package sources (repository) much better than anything available in the Debian-based world does thanks to the notion of vendor change. It's of course true that there are good technical reasons to prefer other distros, as well. > All the main distros are pretty damn stable and solved all the frustration causing issues a long, long time ago IMO. Like I said, I mostly agree with this :)
  - DEADMINCE 2y ago
    > openSUSE has a more sophisticated (and more expensive, computationally and financially) automated QA process (Open Build Service + OpenQA) than many distros, Than which distros, though? More so than Debian? Debian's seems pretty thorough. More so than Red Hat's, with the amount of important customers that depend on their distro? I'm skeptical. The rest are generally offshoots or geared towards a specific purpose or audience. > It's true that nowadays all distros are pretty good, but there are real technical differences between openSUSE and other distros which matter. So let's get into some details and examples! I'm interested and prepared to learn something here, hoping I might be enlightened - I haven't had a moment like that in a real long time, if that makes sense. > The only distro with a distinct lineage that has a package manager much like openSUSE's is Fedora, So, what makes the openSUSE package manager so much better than apk, apt or xbps? Hoping I'm not coming off as too combative, just interested in the convo.
    - 2y ago

DEADMINCE 2y ago

> One issue that always burned me with Fedora is a little configuration file. Wacom tablet support is basically gimped due to it. Everytime I use it I have to fix that, and no, it's not the wayland issue but one due to poor scroll handling. It's hard to find the fix and I tried looking into it right now. Last time I tried it was on Fedora 39, it has been there since 34. Maybe not in 40 though. Isn't Fedora the 'testing' or bleeding edge distro/project for Red Hat? Did you on RHEL Desktop? That's the only RHAT based product that should have defaults that work with those tablets, IMO. Don't you think it's likely there is some hardware out there where an OpenSUSE default causes an issue that doesn't happen in other distros? > I don't know the reason, but I've had a better time with this distribution. I just wanted to share that it is a good one. That's more than fair. I'm just so skeptical when people say $distro is so much better or more stable than all the others. Most of the time someone just had a better experience with it, rather than it being objectively better in some way. All the main distros are pretty damn stable and solved all the frustration causing issues a long, long time ago IMO.

pxc 2y ago
> I'm just so skeptical when people say $distro is so much better or more stable than all the others. openSUSE has a more sophisticated (and more expensive, computationally and financially) automated QA process (Open Build Service + OpenQA) than many distros, which is what has earned its rolling releases the stability that has garnered this reputation. It's perhaps also affected by the predominance of Arch in the rolling release space; it's easy to look stable compared to a distro that sees it as the user's routine duty to watch for and fix certain kinds of incompatibility problems with updates. It's true that nowadays all distros are pretty good, but there are real technical differences between openSUSE and other distros which matter. The only distro with a distinct lineage that has a package manager much like openSUSE's is Fedora, and that's because dnf has copied key zypper features. dnf and zypper handle collections of multiple package sources (repository) much better than anything available in the Debian-based world does thanks to the notion of vendor change. It's of course true that there are good technical reasons to prefer other distros, as well. > All the main distros are pretty damn stable and solved all the frustration causing issues a long, long time ago IMO. Like I said, I mostly agree with this :)
- DEADMINCE 2y ago
  > openSUSE has a more sophisticated (and more expensive, computationally and financially) automated QA process (Open Build Service + OpenQA) than many distros, Than which distros, though? More so than Debian? Debian's seems pretty thorough. More so than Red Hat's, with the amount of important customers that depend on their distro? I'm skeptical. The rest are generally offshoots or geared towards a specific purpose or audience. > It's true that nowadays all distros are pretty good, but there are real technical differences between openSUSE and other distros which matter. So let's get into some details and examples! I'm interested and prepared to learn something here, hoping I might be enlightened - I haven't had a moment like that in a real long time, if that makes sense. > The only distro with a distinct lineage that has a package manager much like openSUSE's is Fedora, So, what makes the openSUSE package manager so much better than apk, apt or xbps? Hoping I'm not coming off as too combative, just interested in the convo.
  - 2y ago