Which one(s) and why?
Arch btw
deleted by creator
I think GNU Guix System scratches all my itches:
- Committed to being 100% free software even at the kernel level (I know this is controversial)
- Focus on reproducible builds
- Atomic updates that can be rolled back if something breaks
- A package manager that makes it relatively easy to package software (there are importer commands that can import from language-specific package managers such as pip and cargo) and makes it possible, as a user, to apply transforms to packages (i.e. build with X commit or with Y patch)
- Per-user profiles (in addition to the root profile and the system profile) allowing user to install software without requiring root. Users can even create separate profiles as well as throwaway profiles for running scripts or one-off commands (i.e. a python or bash script can use
guix shellas its interpreter listing all the packages it requires).
Previously I used Ubuntu from 2008 to 2009, Trisquel from 2009 to 2014, and Debian from 2014 to 2019.
GNU Guix
peak hackability while also having binary downloads
Mint unironically. I’ve reached a point where I’ve got a lot of things going on in my life that I don’t have the time and just need something that works and I don’t need to fiddle around with much.
This makes me feel better. I had the entire intention to distro hop around but mint was the first one and it just worked lol
Which one(s)
Arch.
why?
- The Arch-Wiki
- I like pacman
- The Arch-Wiki
- I wanted a rolling-release distribution.
- The Arch-Wiki
- It just works. I had only one more serious problem in ~8 years of running Arch
- Did I mention the Arch-Wiki?
Edit:
Having said that, I have an eye on immutable distros. Maybe one day I’ll try one out.
Is Manjaro good if I want in on this Arch goodness but don’t want to spend hours configuring stuff? Coming from Fedora
I haven’t used it personally but I’ve seen a lot of folks bad mouthing Manjaro.
Lots of complaints of instability and it being poorly run project. One of the more objective complaints I’ve read is they have a slower release process so security fixes take longer then Arch.
Pop!_OS. I previously got stuck on tiling window managers, but I found that they have prohibitively large amounts of setup involved. It’s also not uncommon for support applications to be poorly maintained or to have a poor UX. Pop!_OS’s desktop gathers everything together very nicely into a working shell with minimal setup, but still has that sweet, sweet tiling WM.
This kind of setup works best for me, a desktop environment with a tiling window manager on the top, that way I can use it like a normal desktop for most things and can hop back and forth between apps I use a lot all on the home row with the window manager.
Windows -> macos -> pop os -> debian -> fedora ↓ Now
- linux mint(desktop)
- slackware(laptop)
- arch linux(Kvm/Qemu for gaming)
- Netbsd(older hardware/for fun)
do you get good battery life with slackware?
Sorry for late reply
For about 4 hours i beleive. Though it used to be longer as i have had it for over a year and the battery not like it used to be.
Kde is the default desktop eviornment.
It helps that its a non systemd init system so it doesnt pull as much resources on the backend since systemwide is controlled via scripts.
If i were to run a lighter one such as xfce, qtile or dwm it would run longer(varies on configuration though)
I settled on openSUSE Tumbleweed because it’s rolling and reliable. I chose KDE Plasma long before I chose my distro.
Using this right now. It’s been a little less stable then I’ve heard other people claim, I had about a day and half where I was consistently freezing up 5 minutes after login. After that was patched it has been fine.
The real test for me is if I can walk away from it for 3 weeks and update the system without the world exploding. That was what always broke Arch for me.
Not sure if it qualify as distrohopping, but for a long time I tried to test every major Linux distro release, and they all had problems with sound, but when Ubuntu 5 came out everything worked out of the box, so I switched my desktop to Linux. A couple of years later, Ubuntu began some introducing some (IMO) questionable things, so I tested the main distros again and landed on Debian, most of all because I knew the system relatively well from Ubuntu.
The first desktop distro I tried was Mandrake (back in 1998), but since I use my desktop for making music, it was just too much work every time I wanted to record something back then.
As for servers, I have always just used what the customer wanted or had, and for most parts it was Red hat.
