this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023
57 points (91.3% liked)

Linux

48375 readers
1126 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 5 years ago
MODERATORS
57
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

I've happily been a Fedora user for many years now, but RHEL's recent choice to put their source code behind a paywall has me pondering ethical considerations of my distro choice.

It's my understanding that this doesn't have a direct impact on Fedora, and I feel confident that it will continue to be a great distro for the foreseeable future, but I want the commercial/enterprise/corporate influence on the distro I run to be as minimal as possible. For it to be as free as possible.

With that in mind, what distros would everyone recommend?

I only have recent-ish experience with Fedora, Debian, Arch, and Ubuntu. I don't really know much about any others.

Ideally, I'd like it to fit within these boxes as well:

  • Reasonable release cycle time. Debian as an example tends to be too stale by it's nature. Edit for clarification: doesn't have to be bleeding edge, just don't want to fight with outdated dependencies if I'm compiling something from source. I feel distros generally ride this line well, but I've run into a handful of times in the past with Debian.
  • Doesn't try too hard to be user friendly. Obsfucating system internals, forcing a specific DE on you, that kind of thing.
  • Not overly time consuming to maintain. Arch would be an example of that in my opinion. Don't get me wrong, Arch is awesome. But maintaining a rolling release and a bunch of AUR's gets tiresome.
  • Doesn't try to force you to use a flatpaks, snaps, etc.

Seeing it all written out, that's pretty picky. And maybe this unicorn distro doesn't exist. But on the other hand, maybe it does.

A final thought. I know Debian has a testing branch. Anyone have any experience using that as a daily driver? Is it viable?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Debian Sid is even more unstable than Arch, though. I'd never recommend it for anyone who doesn't want to be routinely maintaining their system.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's been a few years since I last used Sid, but I don't remember it being that unstable. I've never spent much time with Arch to make that comparison though, so I can't really judge on that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sid is pretty reliable if you pay attention to what you're updating.

If someone wants a more user friendly option, Siduction is a Debian Sid based distro which tries to keep things smooth.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Sounds interesting. Gonna check it out