/tech/ - Tech

Technology.

catalog
Mode: Reply
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8192

Files

Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3

Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules


(127.52 KB 1366x768 i3-16.06rc2.png)
General Distro/DE thread Comrade 06/30/2020 (Tue) 00:07:13 No. 2983
Hola, comrade Anon. What Linux distro is on your device? What Desktop environment? If you say Windows or Mac you're getting sent to the gulag for using Liberal Yankee cyber imperialist software.
I use Solus with KDE Not perfect. Limited software in repositories but the devs have managed to create a nice balance between rolling and stable so I have no desire to change anytime soon.
Gentoo is by far my favourite distrobution. I can install new stuff while still keeping a stable base, unlike arch.
Using Pop RN, but i wont if it breaks, considering i use KDE. After that im either switching to arch, manjaro, or Kubuntu.
Mint Cinnamon, because I don't have the patience anymore. Mainly I just disable most of the bloat. I used Arch and Debian in the past, studying what packages I need, which optional dependencies I need, how to configure it all, etc. And I never succeeded in achieving the polish that Mint now has out of the box. I'd rather spend that effort on writing my own scripts and programs that extend or improve an already complete system. Mint devs proudly write shitty spaghetti code though. Adding simple features or just fixing something often requires a substantial rewrite which they're too stubborn to accept anyway, so why bother when most of the time you can replace what their software does with tailor-made scripts or just other software. Except for the DE itself their own code is luckily limited to inessential and nonstandard stuff like "MintUpdate".
>>2983 I use Gentoo, which is very nice, but also very high maintenance. I also started using Guix, which is a fucking slog so far. I think that distro is half-baked atm.
>>2983 >>2983 I mainly use Debian with XFCE as my desktop environment. I enjoy it for being quite stable and good to use.
>>2993 >Using Pop Literally why? First thing I did when getting a new System76 machine was remove that from my system.
>>3003 Except for the Ubuntu base and terrible branding (imho), Pop has done a lot of good stuff. It really is a pleasure to use Pop OS when you look past their infantile branding and baked-in ubuntu rubbish.
>>2994 unironically i don't why anyone wouldn't opt for arch linux on their home computers at this point. it's such a lovely distro nowaday. the comfiest rolling release distribution.
>>3003 It's nice. It has everything that I use built in and I like the interface in general. If it breaks I'll use Manjaro gnome probably.
>>3003 It's easy for noobs probably. I'd actually reccomend giving it a try if you are entirely new to linux. It's basically a slightly more polished Ubuntu. Bitch about it if you want, if you dont like it, r whatever, but at least it's not windows. And none of us here should be running windows so as far as I'm concerned, all distros are welcome.
I use Void on laptop and Debian unstable on desktop.
I use Ubuntu MATE
arch on the desktop, manjaro on the laptop and ubuntu touch on the phone suckaaaas. its linux all the way down
>>3016 why unstable?
>>3022 Debian stable uses really really fucking old packages. it’s mostly made for server maintainers who don’t really give a fuck about cutting edge content
>>2983 Using Ubuntu MATE for like 2 months now after ditching Winblows completely, but I feel like I do want something better. I like GUIs and am a layman relatively speaking, so I prefer the OS and DE to all be one package that just werks and am thinking about a few distros now. I want KDE and will be avoiding Kubuntu since it comes straight from the serpent's mouth, but is the Ubuntu base really that bad if it's not directly from Canonical? Cause I'm somewhat interested in KDE Neon, and I like Ubuntu somewhat precisely because it's the retard distro. Whenever I look up my brainlet problems with linux I can count on the first results to be answers specifically for Ubuntu, and that's nice. But other than Neon, if I'm looking for jumping off Ubuntu, there's Manjaro KDE, because installing Arch like 'le pro linuggs user' will not go well for me. And there's also OpenSUSE which seems kind of weird and less covered; more of a pro thing I assume I should likely stay away from since I'm not good at console magics. So can I get some anon opinions on which of those I should go with? Or maybe I'm a dumbass for wanting KDE? I don't know, I just want some advice.
>>2994 I've been running Mint Cinnamon for half a decade now too and I'm a fan. It just works and it's pretty slick as well.
>>3024 >I want KDE and will be avoiding Kubuntu since it comes straight from the serpent's mouth, but is the Ubuntu base really that bad if it's not directly from Canonical? Try Pop!_os with KDE if you want a good, sleek distro or try Trisquel with Cinnamon or KDE if you want a libre distro
I use Slackware with i3wm I can get a very minimalist install. It is extremely stable, have been using it for almost a year and I had not even a single problem, and I also like that I have to manage every single aspect by hand, it gives me a sense of control of my system
May Allah forgive me, I've taken the Gnome pill Out of the box it felt like a tablet OS but 5 minutes in PoP's support pages and in gnome tweak tool and it feels amazing I was using Mint w/Cinammon but I keep running into weird, annoying issues like the lockscreen not working properly on lid close and letting me see my screen but not letting me interact with anything until I force the shutdown context box open by hitting the power key to force the lockscreen to appear when I re-open the machine Gnome isn't as fat as I thought it was going to be tbh, its not as light as I'm used to in terms of ram use but everything else feels fine, it doesn't use anymore cpu time etc.
>>3024 >because installing Arch like 'le pro linuggs user' There are scripts to get you going without doing pro shit though. Manjaro is fine though, but I feel like Arch and the community surrounding it has gone a long way. Might want to re-consider it at the very least.
>>3024 You can install KDE on your current Ubuntu to try it out first. Manjaro is nice out of the box, for Arch I like using https://anarchyinstaller.org
>>3039 What are the fundamental differences between Arch and Manjaro other than Manjaro having an installer? I was more under the impression that it effectively was something like anarchyinstaller. Is it more like the difference between Ubuntu and Mint?
why is ubuntu so hated? whats actually wrong with it now that unity is kill?
>>3069 Snap
>>3069 They've decided to end 32-bit library support for one, which is going to totally kill Wine on *buntu systems.
>>3071 I thought they backed down after Steam and a bunch of other big groups freaked out?
>>3071 Seriously? 32-bit libraries are supported on my pop!_os system.
>>3041 The difference is that it has a layer of heavy babysitting for beginners as it tries to behave graphically like your regular ubuntu and a couple more packages in default repo and pre-installed AUR wrapper. That's it. They do not touch the flaws of Arch, that is the AUR itself. You make one of the best package managers (pacman) and only allow it to grab a portion of what other distros like debian have, then plaster on a rehash of slackware's build system and call it a user repo with no official support in order to turn it into a binary-source hybrid. Then add a trillon wrappers and scripts to replicate all the flaws of debian and apt, and make sure none of those are in pacman's space and instead force everyone to install it directly from source. In the end you have the biggest problem of all distros with "unofficial" repos that are mandatory- they break often and suffer quality and inconsistency problems. Crux and second Gentoo are the worst in this regard. Gotta use rsync and ports just to have anything more than the base os or install layman and add dozens of repos just to get my shit running, all while propritary binary trash like chrome is in base and constantly up to date while everything i use is outdated. This is the pain of those poor distros. Half a year ago i looked over potential AUR packages having problems due to dependencies with the pacman packages and surely i found 2- aqemu and mednaffe. For example: Mednafen updated to 1.12 back then and broke compatibility with the current mednaffe version, that being 0.8.6 or whatever. Arch updated mednafen right away in pacman repos but did not take it into account mednaffe which is in AUR and thus it was broken for a few weeks which is how long it took to the AUR maintainers to update it, even though upstream fixed the problem in a day. At the same time in Devuan unstable it took a bit more to update, but when it happened, both of them were updated at once which is exactly how it was intended. At least Parabola and Hyperbola say it plain and clear they don't support AUR but other forks who didn't, have a painful time implementing their changes while still having upsteam AUR support such as Artix which still has trouble keeping up the pace with potteringware (Manjaro has its own stable subset of AUR).
>>3088 >They do not touch the flaws of Arch, that is the AUR itself. You make one of the best package managers (pacman) and only allow it to grab a portion of what other distros like debian have, then plaster on a rehash of slackware's build system and call it a user repo with no official support in order to turn it into a binary-source hybrid. Then add a trillon wrappers and scripts to replicate all the flaws of debian and apt, and make sure none of those are in pacman's space and instead force everyone to install it directly from source. What are your thoughts on Void linux and its package manager?
>>3089 It's much better. The only issues i had was the more complicated syntax: Splitting xbps into xbps-query xbps-install xbps-remove and whatnot was a bad idea as it's better done by a single unified command and an extra argument flag like xbps -Isu. How it actually works on the system and the config file is top notch however. From what i remember it was easy to configure and wasn't needing shit like APT::Install-Recommends "0"; APT::Install-Suggests "0"; added in two new config files just to be able to install Xorg without a bunch of dependencies clashing and trying to install the whole LXQt too. And dracut which is usually only on RPM distros, but that's mostly because im very familiar with how the regular initramdisk found in most distros works internally. The lack of packages is what sucked. But at least it had some very obscure and interesting ones like the ultrix window manager and dozens of others which are AUR only on Arch. Right now for me it's useful as a strata so i can install azpainter without hassle. As for the distro itself: it was good back a year ago when i used it on my server (which runs devuan now), but now after xtreame left the project after the drama i don't think it's too wise to take it seriously anymore. If you looked at the commits on github the dude beat all of his contributors together 1 to 10 in how active he was. The musl version on other hand sucks big time, as a ton of packages segfault right away. Musl branch not being updated correctly was one of the main issues its creator had while he was away. It's also done better by Alpine anyway.
>>3107 >after xtreame left the project after the drama What happened? What did I miss?

Delete
Report

no cookies?