this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2025
164 points (96.1% liked)

Linux

55153 readers
822 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Title is quite self-explanatory, reason I wonder is because every now and then I think to myself "maybe distro X is good, maybe I should try it at some point", but then I think a bit more and realise it kind of doesn't make a difference - the only thing I feel kinda matters is rolling vs non-rolling release patterns.

My guiding principles when choosing distro are that I run arch on my desktop because it's what I'm used to (and AUR is nice to have), and Debian on servers because some people said it's good and I the non-rolling release gives me peace of mind that I don't have to update very often. But I could switch both of these out and I really don't think it would make a difference at all.

(page 6) 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Drito@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

After tried Alpine, NixOS, Archlinux...finally Im on MX linux because this is a no brain distro and I'm tired to search how to make things to work.

[–] phpinjected@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 month ago

trisquel and I love it

[–] Crazyslinkz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Arch, because it has what I want for gaming. Also its simple, lots of help in forums and community driven. Im not too big on rolling, but it's really stable and works.

I have distro hopped a bit, used fedora, ubuntu, debian, and manjora. Stopped on arch as, I like my xfce set up with arch.

KISS - keep it stupid simple or simple stupid.

[–] dragospirvu75@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 weeks ago

I use Trisquel because it is recommended by FSF, is based on Ubuntu and I like Mate environment.

[–] Harrk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

CachyOS! I was on Mint before this and had a bunch of issues running games. I think this was in part from going from NVIDIA to AMD (9070 XT).

Decided I had enough and instead of doing a simple Mint reinstall, I gave Cachy a go. I’ve had a little issue here and there but the experience has been beautifully smooth compared to Mint. It’s now set up better than I had it before and I’m over the moon with it haha.

[–] peterg75@discuss.online 1 points 1 month ago

Manjaro, because Arch-based, rolling release, but with a dev test cycle to try to eliminate breaking patches.

[–] meh@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 month ago

debain, with xfce if i need a desktop. mostly because i started on xubuntu. started learning sysadmin stuff when all i could afford was a potato with salvaged computer components shoved in it. xfce considered that excessively over powered. ended up loving the way i set up my xfce env, and probably wont change it much over the next 20yrs because theres no need. so when cononical got extra gross it was easy to just move to debian and carry on with my life.

[–] qaz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I use OpenSUSE Tumbleweed because it focuses more on KDE than GNOME, is quite stable, and has snapshots to roll back to in case something does go wrong. I don't want to mess with my OS, I just want it to work reliably. I do use Debian on some devices (like my server) but the software (especially in terms of GUI apps) is very outdated and it doesn't come with the other features of OpenSUSE out of the box.

[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I currently use Bazzite on my old laptop, just wanted to try out immutable distros and I like to stream games from my rig to it sometimes so completely functional steam was a nice addition. Plus learning about flatpaks and app images over installed packages has been interesting.

Then on my servers Debian/Proxmox and usually Ubuntu server in LXCs for more updated APTs then Debian, though I mostly run docker for my web apps rather then native APTs.

I work for a company that has a java program that functions on Linux but is nowhere near the level of support provided for mac/Windows, so I'm the Linux guy for our dept and when a customer is running into issues on a distro I'll spin up a vm on my homelab and see if I can rum through an install and get it functional.

So far the only one I literally couldn't get installed was Slackware lol I even figured out how to get it functional in ChromeOSes Linux subsystem.

[–] jcr@jlai.lu 1 points 1 month ago

Using void linux because it has no systemd init system (it uses its own "runit" init system) ; and it is a natutal development after using Debian for a long time and wanting to understand more about gnu/linux system.

Also, it is very reliable with a lot of packages. It is standard enough so using info from arch, debian or other distro works.

But the origin was I could not understand how systemd was managing the system and it felt really contrived to go around it, so I began using void and that's the story.

[–] ocean@lemmy.selfhostcat.com 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Ran Ubuntu and Ubuntu server first then switched to desktop fedora and liked it so I switched all my servers to fedora. Tried TrueNas Scale in the past and disliked it except for SMB shares. Also have an unraid server but hate it.

I guess I’m pretty superficial about just liking the base fedora DE. Idk beyond that.

[–] fox@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

Arch. I'm addicted to updating packages and Arch helps me stay sane.

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

I can set everything up from two config files. If I want to set up something on my laptop I got working on my desktop it's just cut and paste.

Guess my distro

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Raptorox@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

Arch

Found it, love it

[–] A7thStone@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I was given a CD set for SUSE 8.2, then bought the 9.0 book set from a book store because I liked it but wanted the hard copy to reference when I was messing things up. I've tried a ton of other distros, but keep going back to Suse because I'm used to it.

[–] Spider89@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

I like apt and is great stability for servers and unstable branch for desktops/laptops/Legion GO. (Debian with Xanmod).

[–] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I wanted a mainstream option but not Ubuntu, and one that was preferably offered with KDE Plasma pre-packaged.

So I ended up deciding between Debian and Fedora, and what tipped me to Fedora was thinking: Well SELinux sounds neat, quite close to what I learned about Mandatory Access Control in the lectures, and besides, maybe it will be useful in my work knowing one that is close to RHEL.

Now I work in a network team that has been using Debian for 30 years, lol. Kind of ironic, but I don't regret it, now I just know both.

And fighting SELinux was kind of fun too. I modified my local policies so that systemd can run screen because I wanted to create a Minecraft service to which I could connect as admin, even if it was started by systemd.

[–] Crabhands@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago (5 children)

I run a headless Ubuntu server and Mint as my daily driver. I tried Pop OS first, which was great, other than I hated the task bar and had some problems with some apps. I also tried Kubuntu which gave me problem after problem. Mint made everything easy.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] CsXGF8uzUAOh6fqV@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Artix because it is more Arch then Arch according to Arch's own goals: "focuses on simplicity, minimalism, and code elegance". There is no way systemd is more simple, minimal and elegant than its alternatives. I don't think systemd is bad, but I do think it is a bad fit and Artix is what Arch should have been.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›