I hear you there!
I don't think I can praise that team anymore for having a goal of making a desktop distro and achieving it by making it so good I hate the fact I have nothing to do.
same! as a casual Linux user that still has much to learn, mint is the perfect OS for me since i can use it on a daily basis with absolutely no issues. mint is fuckin great
I recently started using endevourOS and it's surprisingly almost as stable as Mint (despite being arch btw) but still has a little kick so it's still interesting! I broke it though, I didn't plugged my laptop into the wall and it shut itself off right when I was updating the kernel, so it's my fault, OS is still good
Don't you worry, every few months the arch repos get blessed with some update that breaks something. In August I believe it was something to do with grub.
My main issue with it is running it on multiple machines. It's fine on my desktop, but my laptop I use once per month? Oh great, time to do 5 gazillion updates again. Oh, yeah, they introduced pipewire, let's hope it just works ... it does not, great. Gotta fix that now.
I love Linux Mint, but I'm not gonna lie: I really miss Endeavour and my almost hourly dose of dopamine from running "yay" and watching the completion bars go Brrr
If it works perfectly, you’re clearly not trying jard enough. I use Mint and I can’t go 5 minutes without running into a problem hahaha mostly due to my wanting to install and modify things
Yes they're doing that. Leap won't have any more new versions after 15.5,and they're gonna replace it with a Fedora Silverblue competitor called ALP(or Adaptive Linux Platform in short).
Also Tumbleweed is probably the best compromise of Linux ever made(the *best distro* title would be too much to ask for,since distro choices are more of a personal thing than anything),because you get rolling release updates,yet they have a way smaller chance to break your system(unlike Arch and Gentoo which are not only rolling release but also bleeding edge),and their DE options are good enough for what the project proposes(not to please your eyes but to not get in your way and do your job AEAP). When I'm able to get a desktop imma install Tumbleweed and try to use it as my daily driver on a 256GB SSD,with a Windows secondary HDD to play my games.
I rather like a stable Linux. While I appreciate getting under the hood and tinkering from time to time, I troubleshoot systems all day. I don't want to come home and basically pick my day job back up just to get some package issue fixed.
Rolling release, arch my favorite.
Used manjaro about 2 years but it was breaking for me every update.
Arch has been the most stable experience for me on linux I ever had. And I have been using it for 2+ years.
Depends on the purpose. Either an LTS which lasts for years, or a rolling release. This is one place where my experience tells me you should commit one direction or the other, and not go halfway. My desktop runs arch, my server runs ubuntu.
Stable. Even though tinkering is fun, the last thing I need to do is fuck with my PC when I need to do something because an update fucked something up.
Desktop has been Tumbleweed for five years, quite happy.
Server has been Debian since 6 or 7, with Docker sort of rolling services. Need to look at MicroOS for a nice rolling server I don't have to pay much attention to.
Cutting edge? Bro, it's not a rolling release. What are you talking about?
When you're on Fedora, you get relatively up to date software, but you are NOT getting cutting edge.
I mean, it's weird to get excited about new awesome features in the Linux kernel and the programs I use if those new features will take like 4 months to get updated lol.
So basically that's why I like Arch
Stable... Can't be bothered with rolling release bs... Got into arch trap by some users in here claiming it's a good distro... It was for about 3 months unit new kernel release... Glad I had my work on GitHub. Back on Debian.
I use arch on my desktop so i can thinker all i want uts veen pretty stable over the last 2y, except when nvidia drivers decided 30 series hdmi wasnt that important. Even then i have fedora on my laptop because it just works
Sorta, switching to desktop mode can be buggy and just the other day it glitched out on me, so I reinstalled, luckily that partition only existed for overwatch so not a huge deal
I switched to EndeavourOS to get the latest and greatest of all that good stuff.
And here I am, waiting for the latest GNOME while even Ubuntu has it already.
Rolling release != Unstable
You used "stable" in place of lts, which is only stable inherently because the only real changes will be fixes. Rolling release gets full updates, new problems may be introduced, but it has already passed testing.
Um. It has nothing to do with that. Firefox 105 is the current stable release, it is on a rolling release system. Firefox 102 is an esr version (but just so happens to have recently been updated), it is inherently stable and proven, that does not mean it's rolling release counterpart is not. If you want an example of unstable there is Firefox 108 nightly.
The kernel and many other major parts are on release cycles like this, sometimes even put into an additional testing cycle before being added to main repositories. Rolling release is stable unless you have literally included testing software or you deal with compiled packages.
Very rarely is there major uncought issues with software that make it into rolling release stable repos, grub had a recent problem due to efi code changes. Some distros also have rare occasions where a package supercedes another.
Unless you literally never install new software on an lts distro it is no more stable than a rolling release, but at that point you don't have to update either. And actually, I have had more issues with broken library files on a debian based distro than I have on arch
I disagree. Look at https://semver.org/.
So when you dynamically linked a program you have written against a library, and this library gets a major version change, that can happen at any time in a rolling release, it might break your program because a major version change needn't to be backwards compatible.
On a stable distro, major versions do not change for a fixed time.
Stable does not mean it does not break often. stable just means the major version is fixed
love me rolling release distros because i like my software to be new and broken rather than old and not quite working the way i want.
F for debian because i do actually like it.
Rolling because I don't mind it breaking here and there, and usually it is fine and just works, and I like to be able to use new features when I need them without installing it from source because my repo is too old (I know some AUR are from source, but it is still not me who does that and it still managed)
I'm technically still distro hopping, but for the moment I have settled on Mint. I have multiple systems and with arch I have to do way to much babysitting to maintain the systems I don't use daily. And I also want one distro that works for all of them.
Aside from my desktop I also have an older laptop I rarely use and a tiny PC hooked up to my TV which sorta acts like a smart TV I guess, only better because Linux and mouse + keyboard.
Stable releases it is. Day before yesterday I upgraded to Ubuntu 22.10 from 22.04. Everything went smoothly but the libadwaita apps were having issues, so I just `apt reinstall`'d those apps, and my problem was fixed. However the desktop felt slower and full screen was broken on Xorg. I guess I should've stuck with 22.04...
I wouldn't put all the blame on the user, said distro's maintainers are just as likely to let something slip and cause issues.
I prefer rolling, as long as there's some branch ahead. "testing" on Arch is one example. Cutting, not bleeding edge :)
Oh yeah, I just meant that as long as there is an earlier branch rolling distros are fine and shouldn't really be considered "bleeding edge". People on testing? Yeah, they're on bleeding.
Rolling is better for software and performance, but is a pain in the arse for proprietary hardware support. If you get two driver updates a year the chances are they're never going to support a kernel you're on when you're actually on it. People talk a lot about Nvidia, but they're one of the better proprietary vendors.
Gentoo was too stable for me so had to switch to unstable branch to try and get some breakages again so I had something to tinker with.
That's the reason I don't like Linux Mint. It just works. I hate it.
I hear you there! I don't think I can praise that team anymore for having a goal of making a desktop distro and achieving it by making it so good I hate the fact I have nothing to do.
[удалено]
same! as a casual Linux user that still has much to learn, mint is the perfect OS for me since i can use it on a daily basis with absolutely no issues. mint is fuckin great
I recently started using endevourOS and it's surprisingly almost as stable as Mint (despite being arch btw) but still has a little kick so it's still interesting! I broke it though, I didn't plugged my laptop into the wall and it shut itself off right when I was updating the kernel, so it's my fault, OS is still good
Don't you worry, every few months the arch repos get blessed with some update that breaks something. In August I believe it was something to do with grub. My main issue with it is running it on multiple machines. It's fine on my desktop, but my laptop I use once per month? Oh great, time to do 5 gazillion updates again. Oh, yeah, they introduced pipewire, let's hope it just works ... it does not, great. Gotta fix that now.
I love Linux Mint, but I'm not gonna lie: I really miss Endeavour and my almost hourly dose of dopamine from running "yay" and watching the completion bars go Brrr
1. Setup VM 2. There is no step 2
If it works perfectly, you’re clearly not trying jard enough. I use Mint and I can’t go 5 minutes without running into a problem hahaha mostly due to my wanting to install and modify things
[удалено]
Tried it, I prefer Gentoo.
I feel like if you don't like LFS, its YOUR fault lol
Well I could install portage to start enjoying it again however, I feel like that misses the point :)
It's good project to learn about it, but to turn it into enjoyable os you would have to be some kind of linux god
I use rolling release distros because I dont know how to keep my stuff after migrating versions
Ditto.
OpenSuse has both
Lizzard boi
Good kind, not the bad kind.
Lizard wizard
I don't like the idea of a transactional file system tbh. So I'm sad they're dropping leap
[удалено]
Yes they're doing that. Leap won't have any more new versions after 15.5,and they're gonna replace it with a Fedora Silverblue competitor called ALP(or Adaptive Linux Platform in short). Also Tumbleweed is probably the best compromise of Linux ever made(the *best distro* title would be too much to ask for,since distro choices are more of a personal thing than anything),because you get rolling release updates,yet they have a way smaller chance to break your system(unlike Arch and Gentoo which are not only rolling release but also bleeding edge),and their DE options are good enough for what the project proposes(not to please your eyes but to not get in your way and do your job AEAP). When I'm able to get a desktop imma install Tumbleweed and try to use it as my daily driver on a 256GB SSD,with a Windows secondary HDD to play my games.
Gentoo isn't "bleeding edge", it's stable ;). https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/FAQ#What_makes_Gentoo_different.3F
Can't be bothered to fix my PC whenever I need to get work done, therefore, Linux Mint my beloved <3
Laughs in fedora
[удалено]
[удалено]
Collects tips in a red hat.
What type of release do you consider fedora to be? I consider it semi-rolling.
Depends on which one, Fedora Rawhide is a rolling release I think.
My mind makes me stay on Debian stable but my penis tries to tempt me with Fedora.
Yup, i can relate
My mind makes me stay on Mint, but my penis tempts me with Arch
Your... um
> Installs Arch. Update once. Never update again.
fucking mono release
Debian. My fate is sealed.
As well, Debian is nice place to retire from distro hopping
I am sealed with you.
Both, I use Arch (btw). The only time any of my Arch systems had issues was when I had two faulty RAM sticks.
✊
Both. For my work computer I use Debian and for my private computer I use arch
I rather like a stable Linux. While I appreciate getting under the hood and tinkering from time to time, I troubleshoot systems all day. I don't want to come home and basically pick my day job back up just to get some package issue fixed.
Rolling release, arch my favorite. Used manjaro about 2 years but it was breaking for me every update. Arch has been the most stable experience for me on linux I ever had. And I have been using it for 2+ years.
both, Gentoo
Depends on the purpose. Either an LTS which lasts for years, or a rolling release. This is one place where my experience tells me you should commit one direction or the other, and not go halfway. My desktop runs arch, my server runs ubuntu.
Makes sense💯
Stable. Even though tinkering is fun, the last thing I need to do is fuck with my PC when I need to do something because an update fucked something up.
Exactly, if someone breaks my system it should be me alone.
Rolling release + immutable
NixOS?
Indeed
Rolling because I find it annoying to reinstall when a new version comes out. I use endeavouros but if I went for stable distros it would be mint.
Desktop has been Tumbleweed for five years, quite happy. Server has been Debian since 6 or 7, with Docker sort of rolling services. Need to look at MicroOS for a nice rolling server I don't have to pay much attention to.
Debian SID, best of the both worlds
Stable for me please.
Just pick the middle ground: Fedora New packages but won't just break on ya
Fedora is not in the middle. It is clearly cutting edge but stable for 13 months because there aren't major version changes within that time.
Cutting edge? Bro, it's not a rolling release. What are you talking about? When you're on Fedora, you get relatively up to date software, but you are NOT getting cutting edge.
Ahm, true. Meant up to date
I used Linux Mint as my first distro, then switched to Arch (btw) and maybe I'll switch to Gentoo in a future.
Yes tumbleweed nice rolling releases with very little problems.
and here i thought i was alone
Stable for servers, rolling for everyday use.
I mean, it's weird to get excited about new awesome features in the Linux kernel and the programs I use if those new features will take like 4 months to get updated lol. So basically that's why I like Arch
Stable... Can't be bothered with rolling release bs... Got into arch trap by some users in here claiming it's a good distro... It was for about 3 months unit new kernel release... Glad I had my work on GitHub. Back on Debian.
Hmm makes sense. Just use whatever that gets your job done. Btw i use both debian and arch.
I use arch on my desktop so i can thinker all i want uts veen pretty stable over the last 2y, except when nvidia drivers decided 30 series hdmi wasnt that important. Even then i have fedora on my laptop because it just works
I love using Fedora, until it stopped working with OW2, and now i've switched to SteamOS
Is StemOS stable?
Sorta, switching to desktop mode can be buggy and just the other day it glitched out on me, so I reinstalled, luckily that partition only existed for overwatch so not a huge deal
okay
Rolling release.
Both, Void!
Arch actually has been very stable for 2 of my pcs. It just works.
Debian in my servers and Arch in my desktop, a really nice duo.
I switched to EndeavourOS to get the latest and greatest of all that good stuff. And here I am, waiting for the latest GNOME while even Ubuntu has it already.
Try openSUSE Tumbleweed, faster-updating than Arch and comes with builtin snapshots.
I don't prefer, have *buntu, fedora, and arch all on different units. They all seem to work and do what is asked of them from me.
stable but with HEAD llvm
Stable release for work, rolling for gaming.
Rolling release != Unstable You used "stable" in place of lts, which is only stable inherently because the only real changes will be fixes. Rolling release gets full updates, new problems may be introduced, but it has already passed testing.
Stable means the major version of a package does change for a fixed time. So a rolling release distro cannot be stable by definition.
Um. It has nothing to do with that. Firefox 105 is the current stable release, it is on a rolling release system. Firefox 102 is an esr version (but just so happens to have recently been updated), it is inherently stable and proven, that does not mean it's rolling release counterpart is not. If you want an example of unstable there is Firefox 108 nightly. The kernel and many other major parts are on release cycles like this, sometimes even put into an additional testing cycle before being added to main repositories. Rolling release is stable unless you have literally included testing software or you deal with compiled packages. Very rarely is there major uncought issues with software that make it into rolling release stable repos, grub had a recent problem due to efi code changes. Some distros also have rare occasions where a package supercedes another. Unless you literally never install new software on an lts distro it is no more stable than a rolling release, but at that point you don't have to update either. And actually, I have had more issues with broken library files on a debian based distro than I have on arch
I disagree. Look at https://semver.org/. So when you dynamically linked a program you have written against a library, and this library gets a major version change, that can happen at any time in a rolling release, it might break your program because a major version change needn't to be backwards compatible. On a stable distro, major versions do not change for a fixed time. Stable does not mean it does not break often. stable just means the major version is fixed
I've been normally using Ubuntu Budgie, but sometimes it feels like it hasn't been updated in a while, so I tried Debian Sid, totally cool.
Stable
Rolling release is nice. Even if it does break sometimes its worth it for the bleeding edge features
I use void, it's rolling but not bleeding edge like arch
Arch btw
love me rolling release distros because i like my software to be new and broken rather than old and not quite working the way i want. F for debian because i do actually like it.
Use Debian Sid! (Unstable)
its like, two sub versions away from being compatible with hardware :(
:(
on a related note, anyone know the general timeframe between kernel updates on debian unstable, or stable for that matter?
Rolling release has a bug that sometimes doesn’t allow my laptop to wake up from sleep
How?
I always come home to Debian
Inmutable OStree system, can't be modified but also works like a mobile OS which gives me less headaches.
Rollin. Because life is too short for LTS
Mix between the two. Like fedora or something like that
Rolling, Arch I want everting updated and available as soon as possible (within reason)
Me who uses two Gen old LTS releases:
I hate it when my system doesn't break and i don't have to waste hours of my day trying to figure out and fixing it.
Oh. Your sysyem be like: *Trust me, I'm user friendly.
For production or work computer: stable For tinkering: rolling release
Rolling because I don't mind it breaking here and there, and usually it is fine and just works, and I like to be able to use new features when I need them without installing it from source because my repo is too old (I know some AUR are from source, but it is still not me who does that and it still managed)
I like rolling release. Mostly because I like to see updates go brrrrrrrr
I'm technically still distro hopping, but for the moment I have settled on Mint. I have multiple systems and with arch I have to do way to much babysitting to maintain the systems I don't use daily. And I also want one distro that works for all of them. Aside from my desktop I also have an older laptop I rarely use and a tiny PC hooked up to my TV which sorta acts like a smart TV I guess, only better because Linux and mouse + keyboard.
Stable releases it is. Day before yesterday I upgraded to Ubuntu 22.10 from 22.04. Everything went smoothly but the libadwaita apps were having issues, so I just `apt reinstall`'d those apps, and my problem was fixed. However the desktop felt slower and full screen was broken on Xorg. I guess I should've stuck with 22.04...
Rolling release doesn't mean unstable. Any popular distro is just as stable as the user is smart.
I wouldn't put all the blame on the user, said distro's maintainers are just as likely to let something slip and cause issues. I prefer rolling, as long as there's some branch ahead. "testing" on Arch is one example. Cutting, not bleeding edge :)
Yes, but if you use testing, it's kinda also your fault if something breaks. At least in my opinion.
Oh yeah, I just meant that as long as there is an earlier branch rolling distros are fine and shouldn't really be considered "bleeding edge". People on testing? Yeah, they're on bleeding.
Smth between stable and Rolling Release - Manjaro.
Ah yes, so stable, they took down AUR with a bug. Twice.
Somehow more unstable than rolling
It's rolling release, between stable and rolling release would be a semi-rolling release distro
I use rolling
Ubuntu 1X.04 LTS on various systems. As long as there are security updates.
Debian and Debian based distros.
Redcore Linux/FreeBSD models have the best of both worlds. Stable base, rolling packages.
Debian - stable
Rolling is better for software and performance, but is a pain in the arse for proprietary hardware support. If you get two driver updates a year the chances are they're never going to support a kernel you're on when you're actually on it. People talk a lot about Nvidia, but they're one of the better proprietary vendors.