• PieMePlenty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    From my experience of Fedora: would you like to update today? Debian: You’re good bro, no updates today.

  • menas@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    I would have put OpenBSD in “focus on security”. Or hell The only prebuild thing their is pain, pain and suffering

  • kekmacska@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    for security, use Tails, Qubes, Whonix, or if you want gaming + security, then Bazzite or Garuda

    • UrheaKekkola@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      You’re confusing security with privacy. While distros you mentioned are great for preventing ISPs and governments from spying on you (privacy), they’re not really any better at preventing hackers from exploiting your vulnerable web server than fedora (security).

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        While distros you mentioned are great for preventing ISPs and governments from spying on you (privacy),

        How do they do that?

        • UrheaKekkola@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          I’m not really expert in this topic, but as far as I know tails is amnesiac os that forgets everything on reboots for example. Both whonix and tails also routes your traffic through TOR which helps hiding your identity.

          Concerning other mentioned distros and also security wise, this comment explains it lot better than I would: https://lemmy.zip/comment/15305364

      • kekmacska@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        no, Qubes, Bazzite, Garuda were made with security in mind. Containerization, selinux enforcing, hash checks, address space layout randomization is also built in. These are all more secure than Fedora. Qubes for example, uses vm containers to completly isolate every app, so the system is almost impossible to compromise by malware or hacking. Bazzite uses immutable root file system, much like stock android. it may not along well with unix philosophies, but there isn’t really a way for a malicious code to run with elevated privilages or to manipulate system files. Garuda automatically creates snapshota from the system, so if it is compromised, it can be rolled back quickly. Snapshots for external devices or cloud are supported as well. It uses zram compression on swap, this helps avoid data leakages to the disk, so makes sure that after a reboot, every session quits, since data from ram can’t leak on the disk. it also uses firejail and chaotic aur sandboxing. There is a smaller support for secure boot too. So these are all highly secure operating systems. And to some degree, privacy and security overlap each other.

        • UrheaKekkola@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Yeah my bad, you’re right. I got too stuck on tails, which is in my opinion more focused on privacy than security, and ignored everything else.

          • kekmacska@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            Tails in itself is reasonably secure too, but it was mostly designed for use with public computers and forensics, and ofc to conceal network activity that might seem suspicious. And it is a good solution if you need a portable linux, and your android phone is not a good choice for your use case.

  • Read Bio@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    More accurate i would describe Fedora is:
    Adopting Modern features first(Wayland,pipewire,etc Like there is no x mode in most stable Wayland desktops) and only having free and open source Repos(Rpmfusion can be added but its not official and excludes the Kernel drivers).

  • Ephera@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    I think, a more serious attempt to summarize openSUSE would probably be: Functionality

    Debian, Arch, Fedora and such are all weirdly similar in that they focus so much on minimalism. For example, Debian uses dash as the default shell, which breaks TTYs, but possibly squeezes out a tiny bit of performance, so I guess, that’s worth it…?

    • kekmacska@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      i used Tumbleweed with KDE. It is something i can recommend. Not that customizable, but it has tons of features and very stable for a rolling distro. It only breaks if you try to customize stuff too much

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Debian only uses dash for the system shell, and it does improve performance a bit given how many shell scripts run on a typical Linux system. Interactive shell is still set to Bash by default.

    • _cryptagion [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.comdeleted by creator
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      I’ve never had any issues with my Arch install being unpredictable. It has always worked exactly as I expected it to, even though I update it every couple of days.

      • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        I’ve been using Arch since 2014. If I could be arsed, I could write you a looooooooong list of regressions I’ve had to deal with over the years. For an experienced Linux user, they’re usually fairly easy to deal with, but saying you never have to deal with anything is just a lie.

        My experience with Arch is basically: it’s all very predictable until it isn’t and you suddenly find yourself troubleshooting something random like unexplainable bluetooth disconnects caused by a firmware or kernel update.

        • Dempf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          What you’ve said is true, though it’s a bit of a trade-off – over the years I’ve wasted so many hours with those “user friendly” distros because I need a newer version of a dependency, or I need to install something that isn’t in the repos. Worst case I have to figure out how to compile it myself.

          It’s very rare to find something that isn’t in the Arch official repos or the AUR. Personally I’ve found that being on the bleeding edge tends to save me time in the long run, as there’s almost no barriers to getting the packages that I need.

          • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            What you’ve said is true, though it’s a bit of a trade-off

            Yes, and that’s why after more than 10 years I still use Arch. I like having the latest version of things and I’m confident enough in my abilities that I know that if something breaks I can always either find a fix, or at least identify the offending package, hold it back, report the bug and wait for the issue to be resolved.

            There are times where it can be trying though. The first plasma 6 releases for example were rough. More recently, I’ve also been having issues with 6.11 and 6.12 kernels and my ax200 wifi that I only recently found a fix to. My wifi would freeze whenever I started streaming video from the PC to my TV, but only in kernels after 6.11. Turning off TCP segmentation offloading with ethtool resolved it (ethtool -K wlan0 tso off). You don’t want to know how long I had been pulling my hair out at that issue until I found the fix.

        • _cryptagion [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.comdeleted by creator
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Did you consider that the problems you have might not be problems that other people experience? I very highly doubt our two systems are at all similar. Your experience is just that, yours, and so you don’t have any right to be arbitor over whether or not I’m lying.

          • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            That’s such a cop-out answer and totally missing the point. I’ve run Arch on 4 different systems, and yes I had different issues on each and sometimes issues that hit across the board.

            At the end of the day, whether or not this was just my personal experience doesn’t matter. What matters is that the issues were always caused by what Arch is: a unstable rolling release distro that pushes out the latest version of upstream packages, bugs and all. Sooner or later some will hit you, telling yourself and other people otherwise is deluding yourself and those people.

            • _cryptagion [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.comdeleted by creator
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              Yeah, and sooner or later, I’ll die of old age, or cancer, or an accident, or get audited on my taxes.

              None of those things have happened yet either. Not only that, but the same is true for every operating system that has ever existed, or will ever exist, including every distro of Linux.

              • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 years ago

                Here’s the thing: your answer is both invalidating and ignorant, and it shows a lack of understanding of what differentiates Arch from a stable distro.

                • My wifi, that had been working fine since I installed this computer in 2020, broke in kernel 6.11 and 6.12 because Arch pushed those updates.
                • Early plasma 6.0 releases were rough as balls for months, because Arch pushed those updates.
                • My bluetooth, that had been working since I installed this computer in 2020, started to randomly disconnect sometime last year due to buggy firmware updates because Arch pushed those updates.
                • Hell even plain old intel ethernet on my old system from 2014 suddenly started hanging up under load a year or two ago (never found the cause, did find a workaround).

                None of these issues were a fault of my own, all I did was pacman -Syu, and none of this would happen on a stable distro. I’m not saying Arch is shit because of this, I’m saying: beware of what you are getting into when you choose Arch: for every single package on your system, you are effectively at the mercy of whatever “upstream” decides to shit out that week. Being delusional about that fact and having guys come crawling out of the woodworks everytime this is mentioned, saying platitudes like: “I nEvEr HaD aN iSsUe” doesn’t help anyone.

      • luluu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        It has always worked exactly as I expected it to

        Just expect it to break, then it will behave as expected taps head

      • kekmacska@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        imagine if you update it after 2 weeks. Arch is okay, if you keep backups. otherwise, you are basically playing a russian roulette

      • kekmacska@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        i started learning about linux 4 months ago. Installed Arch with archinstall pretty easily to a VM, it booted up no problem. But you have to manually install the desktop, if you want a gui (who doesn’t lol). But there are many desktops for Arch, the most common ones have pretty good documentation. But if i were you, i’d experiment with some more niche desktop emviroments

        • 1985MustangCobra@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          I haved used many distros and DEs. my favorites are keyboard driven like i3 and such. For now i use fedora because i needed something to work out of the box. I would like to stay in the terminal.

          • kekmacska@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            i tried lxqt and gnome. those were disappointments. And i used kde and cinnamon too, those are good

        • Spectrism@feddit.orgdeleted by creator
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          No need to manually install desktop environments, archinstall also does that (Profile --> Desktop).

            • Spectrism@feddit.orgdeleted by creator
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              You did, probably just didn’t see it ;) It’s been part of it for years, since around 2020 according to GitHub. But to be fair, calling the option “Profile” might not be very intuitive for some people, so it’s easy to miss.

      • MehBlah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Just use kvm/qemu and install it. When I want to play with detailed setups I install slackware and start configuring/compiling.

    • Zink@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Mint: come for the ease of installation and use, stay because it’s just Ubuntu and Debian under the hood so it has tons of support, and the terminal is right there if you need to out so some real shit.

      I think mine doesn’t roll off the tongue in quite the same way.

  • Zozano@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Ha. You want STABLE, use NixOS.

    If you’re cannot parse the configuration file, you don’t update. It is perfectly, 100% stable, about 60% of the time (when I change my config file without an error).

    • kekmacska@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      nixOS appeals to niche audiences who like to brag about it. I think it is not a good idea to base everything on config files, since there is a lot of room for user error

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Not to mention it is a utter pain in the ass.

        With that being said, if just the package manager was a config file and there was a reasonable CLI then I could get on board.

      • Zozano@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        The config files literally won’t compile if there is an incompatibility or error in the code.

        Also, every distro has an audience who love to brag about it. The worst part of being a Nix user is I can no longer say “Arch BTW”.

      • visc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        NixOS is for people who have accidentally uninstalled 90% of their system because they didn’t pay attention to what other packages depend on the thing they were uninstalling and were desperately looking for a an undo button.

    • Zozano@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      I’m still a Linux noob all things considered, and I’ve been using NixOS for six months or more.

      It is HARD, but I see the true value of it. I will never need to reinstall Linux because I broke it, that’s simply impossible.

      If I ever need to migrate my system, it’s all backed up to github. With a single

      Bash update.sh
      

      every single .config file backed up, system upgraded, all packages updated.

      I just love Nix, it’s the perfect OS for me.

      Now I just need to learn how to use flakes…

      Sidebar: I’ve never asked before, but maybe someone can help me out. If I install a flake of an application, am I supposed to add it to the existing flake, or can I modulate flakes?

      I’ve noticed when installing the nixvim flake it generates a new flake and it runs when I issue the

      nix run ~/.dotfiles/nixvim/flake.nix
      

      command, but I don’t want to have to run that command every time. I feel like making a fish abbreviation isn’t the correct way of doing this.

      • tinkling4938@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        So I’ve only been using nix about a year and only used flakes. I use in two ways.

        First, I have my main nix flake. Most everything is controlled from that. It has several outputs from full blown nixos builds per host or some home manager builds for non-nixos systems.

        Third-party flakes I use as inputs to my own flake then use the override system to inject them into nixpkgs. Then I just install whatever like normal from nixpkgs. I can either override an existing pkg (neovim nightly replaces regular neovim for me), or you can just add as a new package to nixpkgs by using a different attribute name.

        Second way is for projects with their own repo. I’ll add a project flake that has a devshell with direnv so as soon as I enter that directory it sets up a sort of virtual environment just for that project. You can add outputs to it so others can use as a third-party flake.

        My main starting point was https://github.com/Misterio77/nix-config for this design.

  • specterspectre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I think I’ve put fedora on at least 4 personal systems and it has never caused an issue. It’s so smooth it’s boring in the best way. Switched to it for daily computing about 4 years ago. I use a minipc as a media server with Arch and turning it on it’s exciting. Just this fucking morning the default configuration decided that my main audio device was a microphone. Lovely. So flexible.

    • Lucy :3@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      On the other hand, my server running Arch testing has never had any issues. In fact, the only issue on any of my devices, all Arch testing, was nvidia.

      • specterspectre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        This is a YMMV situation. I had Gentoo running on a minipc for a while and it never had any random issues pop up. Any screw up was fully traceable to configuration and entirely my fault. It was kinda funny. Hope your server stays healthy.