151–160 of 345 posts
If you are comfortable with Ubuntu then perhaps Debian [1], the OS that Ubuntu was forked from would feel natural? [1] - https://www.debian.org/
Wow, if there's one thing open source projects are known for, it's dated websites
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've used exclusively Debian on all my servers and laptops for the last 20ish years. Can confirm, it will continue to keep working, however there might be some things that piss one off in a similar manner as Ubuntu's snaps. I hate systemd for example, but grudgingly accept it.
why the aversion to systemd?
I don't like everything depending on systemd it feels like too much complexity at the wrong part of the stack. It doesn't jive with my sense of architecture, it's not well designed software.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's 1.4mb for an incredibly simple page, and a modern design doesn't mean it needs to be some bloated webapp
1.4 MB? WTH, Debian's current page is 14 KB, that is 0.014 MB. 1.4 MB, good grief, that is larger than Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment.
It depends on whether you're looking at just the HTML or at the page as a whole. The HTML is that small, but there are a couple of JPEG photos on the home page, each weighing on the order of hundreds of kilobytes; the total including these photos is around 1.4 MB.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've used exclusively Debian on all my servers and laptops for the last 20ish years. Can confirm, it will continue to keep working, however there might be some things that piss one off in a similar manner as Ubuntu's snaps. I hate systemd for example, but grudgingly accept it.
why the aversion to systemd?
Honestly, if you want steady progress and consistency, if you want changes that are thought out, well reasoned, discussed and sensibly implemented, you should consider the BSDs. Even ignoring the systemd stuff separating Linux from the rest of the world, there are just so many ways all these Linux distros are trying, often gratuitously, to differentiate themselves from each other. Often it's sloppy, and the end resul…
The process was shockingly smooth. The conf files are mostly in the same places. It was... nice. At the same time I took my desktop from Ubuntu 14 (2014) to 22 and ended up giving up and reinstalling. That was more expected. I was shocked that the FreeBSD upgrade just worked.
It seems most people agree that the snap is a good idea, but not well implemented. I for one use snap packages when they are available for better security, because, if there is a vulnerability, say in Firefox, the malware will be jailed in its container. That’s one more layer. Sandboxing is desperately needed in desktop operating systems. Another advantage that is portability. Snap export nextcloud and import somewhe…
Flatpak is just the better snap. The only reason Ubuntu doesn't use it is that it isn't controlled by them.
I live in a region with a lot of government contracting businesses, so Red Hat Enterprise Linux is something I have to maintain a working familiarity with. However, I use Debian for all of my personal projects and infrastructure. The reason? There's no for-profit corporate interest directly controlling the project. The project's organizational structure resembles a constitutional democracy: https://www.debian.org/int…
Distrowatch carries on after all these years, and (at the least) gives a fairly good catalogue of Linux and BSD distro capabilities in textual and tabular format. https://distrowatch.com/ Try some out as VMs before comitting to bare metal installs. EDIT: I see that MX Linux continues to reside as the "top" distro according to that site's methodology. MX has been on top there for a very long time.
It's methodology is page hits so it can be manipulated pretty easily. I see MX Linux at the top but I never see people talking about it on social media so it makes me wonder how it got to the top of the list.
Very pragmatic mindset towards daily driver on whatever(common) hardware under whichever circumstances.
Maybe that motivated users to rank it up there? (I didn't, btw.)