Current Events > Thinking of Linux distro hopping this weekend, any suggestions?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I've used openSUSE as a daily driver for a few months and like it. previously used Ubuntu, popOS, and Manjaro.

for me it's a good balance of easy-to-use and being forced to tinker/learn things.

RasterGraphic posted...

Been using Catchy for the last several days.

It's certainly fast, but I wouldn't call it painless. But the experience is forcing me to learn new stuff which was part of the point of this exercise.

I am missing apt though, partially because I still have to use some closed source stuff for school and the like. Linux support for closed source stuff is very Ubuntu/Debian centric. I'm still not comfortable with work arounds or aur.

apt is a slow garbage package manager, and Archs repos plus the AUR have infinitely more software than anything available for it. Just enable the AUR and never look back. You will never have to think about a PPA, its just there. Just install yay and use yay <whatever> even for regular software, it will find anything. But octopi will if you prefer GUI. There is a bit of a learning curve as youll sometimes get regular repo and AUR git version as a choice and have to choose, but once you get used to it, I hate having to use anything not Arch-based on a desktop.

I would only ever touch Debian based for servers, but if thats your preference, try PikaOS. Cosmo is a madman and put in a ton of work updating all Debians ancient packages to be in line with Arch. Plus it uses rEFInd as a boot loader, so points for that.

Also, whatever default text editor its terminal uses sucks. I can't wrap my head around it. I don't think it's vim because the commands don't seem to work. It might be micro which I have little to no experience with. I need to switch it to nano when I have time.

I dont even know what you mean u less youre talking about whatever editor git auto opens when you do an interactive rebase or something. I use neovim for that, so I just set EDITOR=nvim.

I do love how snappy it is though. It's nice to actually use my computer without bloat programs slowing things down or otherwise distracting me.

Yeah, its great, especially if you use the kernel manager / scheduling tool to choose a scheduler suited to your CPU. But the kernel has a ton of optimizations and patches built into it, all custom, that you have to go out of your way to get anywhere else. Thats why its the best for gaming and productivity.

I used openSuse for couple days back in 2013.

I remember being impressed with it's pleasant graphic design, but I don't remember why I switched from it to Mint.

Apt is slow garbage and ppas cannot replace the aur. I'm with Xyn on this.

I stopped using -buntu distros the moment I noticed that I was just using PPAs for everything because all the software in the default repos were way out-of-date. That, and Snaps were just introduced at the time and didn't theme well with anything.

FL81 posted...

I stopped using -buntu distros the moment I noticed that I was just using PPAs for everything because all the software in the default repos were way out-of-date. That, and Snaps were just introduced at the time and didn't theme well with anything.

That was me, but it was like 2012 or something when I realized it lol.

Tyranthraxus posted...

There's no reason to dual boot with Ubuntu anymore you can just get it on WSL

This is my first time learning of this, and I'm just starting my Google rabbit hole.

If I do linux via wsl, does it have to be Ubuntu? Or can I just get windows to function like gnome?

Rika_Furude posted...

every time someone asks which distro to use, 5 different people reply with 5 different distros

which is the one true distro (for gaming/general use)

Seen it posted and re-posted that distro doesn't actually matter and it's really just what DE you want.

How much water that actually holds, I don't know.

DnDer posted...

If I do linux via wsl, does it have to be Ubuntu? Or can I just get windows to function like gnome?

No, but only the official WSL distro versions on the Windows store or others on github may work 100% out of the box.

Gnome beyond apps and panel is a challenge.

DnDer posted...

If I do linux via wsl, does it have to be Ubuntu? Or can I just get windows to function like gnome?

Only a few distros are supported out of box but there's an official way to run any distro. You just have to do a little extra work.

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/use-custom-distro

DnDer posted...

Seen it posted and re-posted that distro doesn't actually matter and it's really just what DE you want.

There's surprisingly a lot of know-how that's easily transferable between different Linux systems. Like, the Arch Linux Wiki is still one of the best resources, even if you're on something like Ubuntu.

The biggest difference really boils down to package management.

FL81 posted...

There's surprisingly a lot of know-how that's easily transferable between different Linux systems. Like, the Arch Linux Wiki is still one of the best resources, even if you're on something like Ubuntu.

The biggest difference really boils down to package management.

Eventually Flatpak will remove even that problem. Long term it's going to be mostly what auto config options do you want and do you like the engineers maintaining the OS.

Until they prematurely replace Flatpak with the new thing that will totally make everything better

Starks posted...

Apt is slow garbage and ppas cannot replace the aur. I'm with Xyn on this.

Honestly, I'm not seeing or understanding the appeal so far.

I don't get it.

Even if aur is objectively faster software, the process of actually using it is pretty unintuitive to me thus far.

Too much of the software I use is closed source and relies on deb packages. Looking up the process takes more time than simply double clicking the archive in Mint.

There is probably a utility to make it easier but I really don't have time today to look into that.

AUR is awful and everything you don't want to do in regards to software. People need to stop suggesting it

I have complaints about apt but speed isn't one of them wtf. Shit is crazy fast.

For all else being equal, the dpkg to unpack and looping for hooks and configurations add up. Pacman zooms through each package once, no rounds of configuration.

RasterGraphic posted...

Honestly, I'm not seeing or understanding the appeal so far.

I don't get it.

Even if aur is objectively faster software, the process of actually using it is pretty unintuitive to me thus far.

Too much of the software I use is closed source and relies on deb packages. Looking up the process takes more time than simply double clicking the archive in Mint.

There is probably a utility to make it easier but I really don't have time today to look into that.

Its literally just installing yay, then the world is your oyster.

yay <software>
yay -Syu will also update all that software in a single command. The thought of clicking some archive like Windows literally made me cringe.

Tyranthraxus posted...

I have complaints about apt but speed isn't one of them wtf. Shit is crazy fast.

No its not. Its dreadfully slow compared to other package managers, especially if you have a gigabit connection.

MagiMarthKoopa posted...

AUR is awful and everything you don't want to do in regards to software. People need to stop suggesting it

PEBCAK

PraetorXyn posted...

PEBCAK

Installing software should be fast, easy, and simple. Nobody even reads the ToS of things they install, but Linux elitists think anyone is going to read build files and source code of things that have no vetting or verification

AUR is trash, objectively

PraetorXyn posted...

No its not. Its dreadfully slow compared to other package managers, especially if you have a gigabit connection.

Dreadfully slow means type apt-get and wait 30 seconds I guess I'm just ok with things being dreadfully slow.

MagiMarthKoopa posted...

Installing software should be fast, easy, and simple. Nobody even reads the ToS of things they install, but Linux elitists think anyone is going to read build files and source code of things that have no vetting or verification

AUR is trash, objectively

No it isnt. 99% of packages are fine, and theyre all in a single place, installed by a single AUR helper and kept up to date by the same, which is fast, easy, and simple.

Having to add additional package repos every time you need a new piece of software not in the official repositories is whats objectively garbage.

Tyranthraxus posted...

Dreadfully slow means type apt-get and wait 30 seconds I guess I'm just ok with things being dreadfully slow.

30 seconds is dreadfully slow compared to 5, yes.

PraetorXyn posted...

No it isnt. 99% of packages are fine, and theyre all in a single place, installed by a single AUR helper and kept up to date by the same, which is fast, easy, and simple.

"Oh it's fine, only 1% of the packages there are going to steal your bank info"

PraetorXyn posted...

30 seconds is dreadfully slow compared to 5, yes.

How often are you installing packages lol

You do like apt-get update once a month or just have it run on cron and literally don't even think about it.

And that's only for things you can't get from flathub

MagiMarthKoopa posted...

Installing software should be fast, easy, and simple. Nobody even reads the ToS of things they install, but Linux elitists think anyone is going to read build files and source code of things that have no vetting or verification

AUR is trash, objectively

Core repos cover 90% of software you might need. AUR fills a very specific need: I want to install an app, ensure the proper dependencies, and perform a native build of anything I may need that's not already a packaged binary. Usually, bleeding edge versions or straight from git.

I'm not aware of an easy, clean way to do that on Ubuntu.

A flatpak or snap won't necessarily feel native.

MagiMarthKoopa posted...

"Oh it's fine, only 1% of the packages there are going to steal your bank info

Wow the FUD. Tell me theres no reason to take you seriously without telling me.

The worst youll ever run into is a broken package, which is usually temporary. But if you want to have to add a new repo every time you need a new piece of software, more power to you. Its your time your wasting, mine is precious.

Starks posted...

Core repos cover 90% of software you might need. AUR fills a very specific need: I want to install an app, ensure the proper dependencies, and perform a native build of anything I may need that's not already a packaged binary. Usually, bleeding edge versions or straight from git.

I'm not aware of an easy, clean way to do that on Ubuntu.

I'm pretty sure you can just use git to do it straight from git. Or curl + make if you're really going hardcore.

Tyranthraxus posted...

How often are you installing packages lol

You do like apt-get update once a month or just have it run on cron and literally don't even think about it.

And that's only for things you can't get from flathub

Often, and I update once a week on Arch. Every time I have to update Proxmox it crawls, dont tell me apt isnt slow.

Tyranthraxus posted...

I'm pretty sure you can just use git to do it straight from git. Or curl + make if you're really going hardcore.

The difference is you have to do it again, for every package, every time theres a new build, instead of just running:
yay -Syu

Practically unmanageable PPA collisions are a far worse problem than needing to use the AUR's voting and reporting system to maintain order.

Tyranthraxus posted...

I'm pretty sure you can just use git to do it straight from git. Or curl + make if you're really going hardcore.

Emphasis on clean. I don't feel like doing a git clone and make install.

Starks posted...

Practically unmanageable PPA collisions are a far worse problem than needing to the AUR's voting and reporting system to maintain order.

Yeah. PPAs are also just a general pain in the ass. But extra repos always are.

PraetorXyn posted...

The difference is you have to do it again, for every package, every time theres a new build, instead of just running:
yay -Syu

If this is something I had to do for a nightly for some reason you literally just do it once and save it as a script. Then run the script on cron. Why overcomplicate things?

Tyranthraxus posted...

If this is something I had to do for a nightly for some reason you literally just do it once and save it as a script. Then run the script on cron. Why overcomplicate things?

You either constantly maintain a script every time you add a new package, or you maintain a different script for every package you build.

Why would I want to, and why should I have to? yay lets me search for, build, and automatically update build, as many pieces of software outside the arch repos, which have the vast majority of things already, as I want. Why on earth would I use anything else?

Youre basically saying Why not do a bunch of extra work?
Because developers made it so I get a far superior result for far less.

Consider the following scenario: I want to install the latest Mesa code but it's not packaged or released yet. How would I do that on a few distros?

Vanilla Arch: sudo pacman -S --needed git base-devel && git clone https://aur.archlinux.org/yay.git && cd yay && makepkg -si && yay -S mesa-git

Endeavour: yay -S mesa-git

Ubuntu: sudo apt update && sudo apt install -y software-properties-common && sudo add-apt-repository -y ppa:oibaf/graphics-drivers && sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade -y

Starks posted...

Consider the following scenario: I want to install the latest Mesa code but it's not packaged or released yet. How would I do that on a few distros?

Vanilla Arch: sudo pacman -S --needed git base-devel && git clone https://aur.archlinux.org/yay.git && cd yay && makepkg -si && yay -S mesa-git

Endeavour: yay -S mesa-git

Ubuntu: sudo apt update && sudo apt install -y software-properties-common && sudo add-apt-repository -y ppa:oibaf/graphics-drivers && sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade -y

Most people are also going to have git, base-devel, and yay installed already too, so the Arch command is just the Endeavour one.

Can never assume anything with Arch. And Oibaf's PPA is a fairly unique exception here with it almost being mission critical for Canonical. Maybe the only PPA you'd want to run on Ubuntu 25.04 rolling code at the moment. For basically any other PPA, it would be out of date or causing repo codename mismatches.

Starks posted...

Can never assume anything with Arch. And Oibaf's PPA is a fairly unique exception here with it almost being mission critical for Canonical. Maybe the only PPA you'd want to run on Ubuntu 25.04 rolling code at the moment. For basically any other PPA, it would be out of date or causing repo codename mismatches.

Right. And without PPAs, you have to manually maintain builds from git. An even bigger pain in the ass.