Linux

5376 readers

38 users here now

A community for everything relating to the linux operating system

Also check out !linux_memes@programming.dev

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Ategon@programming.dev

anzo@programming.dev

dwraf_of_ignorance@programming.dev

142

How happy are you with your current distro? (lemmy.zip)

submitted 5 months ago by Blaze@lemmy.zip to c/linux@programming.dev

152 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] naeap@sopuli.xyz 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Because of all the nice feedback about OpenSUSE:
SUSE was my first (bought) Linux distribution, at a time when I would have spent days downloading an ISO, SUSE was available with a manual in store. That was nice.

But then I had an AVM Fritz! ISDN card and it was a complete shit show to get this working. Especially as YAST(2?) didn't support the configuration I needed, but every time you opened it, it would overwrite your manual changes in some configuration files.
(Edit: I'll probably need to add, that this was like 25 years ago. So besides "fuck, I'm old", my perspective in SUSE is very probably not up-to-date)

After that I hopped through a few distros and mostly stayed with basic Debian.

Nowadays I'm mostly using Manjaro (or just Arch itself, if I don't need X), because I like the Arch package system and actually also the whole system architecture... Don't exactly know what it is, but I feel much more at home.
With apt I sometimes found myself in situations, where a fresh install will resolve things faster than trying to restore/save the system. With Arch I always was somehow able to restore everything.

Can someone tell me how Tumbleweed differs/excels?
Thanks in advance!
Currently waiting for my new laptop (Framework 16 :-D) and that would be a nice opportunity to try something new.
But as I need my device for work, it's important to me, that I really have it under my control and am not depending on some half-baked configuration utility like YAST was.

Edit: I'm also playing with the thought of moving to something immutable. NixOS looked nice in concept, but the more I read about it, the more I see that it's more suitable for more server than my laptop - but maybe I'm wrong here, as I don't have any hands-on experience

[–] Maragato@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

The main difference between Arch and Tumbleweed, apart from the package type, is the update system. Tumbleweed does it through snapshots, which allows you to use the openQA automatic test to test the snapshot before sending it to the community. Arch upgrades on a package-by-package basis, regardless of the other packages that are part of the system.

[–] heleos@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago

My Framework 16 is arriving Monday! And I use Tumbleweed on my desktop. I currently use clonezilla every couple days and am starting to mess around with some other distros, but I keep coming back to Tumbleweed. My desktop is mostly for gaming, and it has pretty new hardware, so I like to have more leading edge packages.

I keep trying NixOS, and while I like it and it's cool, I have a mouse capture issue in World of Warcraft that I just can't solve, so it's taking a back seat. Also tried Bazzite, but had some issues during install, so didn't try it much. Currently trying endeavour, I've been using Arch off and on since 08, it's nice.

But Tumbleweed just works. It has sane defaults, updates frequently, has snapper just in case something goes wrong (but other distros can do that too), has yast for people that like it, but I've been trying to run some benchmarks between endeavour and Tumbleweed and I can't really tell a difference.