What is your go-to Linux distro and why?

pluja@lemmy.world to Linux@lemmy.ml – 160 points –

I'd like to settle on a distro, but none of them seem to click for me. I want stability more than anything, but I also value having the latest updates (I know, kind of incompatible).

I have tested Pop!_Os, Arch Linux, Fedora, Mint and Ubuntu. Arch and Pop being the two that I enjoyed the most and seemed the most stable all along... I am somewhat interested in testing NixOS although the learning curve seems a bit steep and it's holding me back a bit.

What are you using as your daily drive? Would you recommend it to another user? Why? Why not?

223

Arch because I like simple.

Other distros are an exercise in patience I think. Each Ubuntu version has different names and versions of stuff like docker, mysql and everything else. It's really annoying to work with. I assume all six month distros are like that. And you have to add extra repos, keys and whatnot for it to even find things.

With arch, since it's rolling, I just install the latest version and I already know the command. It's always the same. Always.

There are many reasons I like arch but the simplicity of the installations is one of my favorite reasons to use it.

Debian. I always come back to Debian.

It's just a rock solid, multipurpose distro that has everything. If you have an issue with some older software versions, you can just track testing or sid and treat it as rolling release or use flatpaks for GUI apps.

To me, Debian is almost perfect.

To me, Debian is almost perfect.

I agree, but ever since systemD, well...

Simpsons "Old man yells at cloud" meme, but it reads "Old man yells at systemD"

I decided to switch to Devuan a long time ago, because it's an opinionated Debian that align better with my preferences. The Devuan community prefer the simple solutions like ALSA, sysvinit (and others), udev independent of systemd, would rather avoid dbus and so on.. the thing is I've never made the switch. I'm now running old old stable Debian with sysvinit, ALSA etc.. but soon™ when I decide to clean up the mess that is my computer, I'll rebase to Devuan which does what I want out of the box :P

I wouldn't call it rock solid... It was running old versions of kde with lots of bugs. Bugs that had been fixed months ago.

So I don't know. It's good we have choice but I don't personally see Debian as more stable than arch. I see it as having older bugs than arch.

KDE could fix 80% of it's bugs overnight and it will still be the most bug-ridden DE by a longshot

Yep, most features and most bugs. I go back and forth between kde and Gnome when a bug annoys me too much.

For the past six years it has been Kubuntu, but I think it's time to finally abort Canonical and their idiosyncrasies and choose Debian as a KDE base, especially now that Debian 12 includes non-free firmware by default.

I kinda hope they rebase KDE neon to debian. That would be dope.

This is what I need to do. Just too much inertia in my own stuff to make the switch so far.

I use kde neon, I much prefer it to Kubuntu.

If you're looking for stable and up to date, give openSUSE Tumbleweed a shot.

Also openSUSE project provide OBS, which is replacement of Aur on Arch.

This is the way.

I changed GPU recently and felt like doing a fresh install and tried openSUSE Tumbleweed (was using EndeavourOS before). Very stable and fast.

second that. after arch, manjaro, debian and ubuntu i landed there as my daily desktop driver.

for servers, i still stick with debian, but might also go for an immutable rolling release distro next

Absolutely. Rolling distro with stability is very rare in the linux world. Opensuse TW is rock solid with updated software. I stopped distro hopping because of it.

I'm actually in the middle of deciding on a new distro, I'm trying to get away from Ubuntu/snap, but Debian 12 with LxQt or Xfce isn't playing nice with my laptop. I just finished writing out Mint and Tumbleweed flash drives, gonna give them both a shot, but I've never really used openSUSE before.

Any tips? Particular things you like about it

Honestly, what I like about it started with the mascot. Otherwise, I like the fact that the rolling release has automatic testing to make sure it's mostly reliable. Many people will also tell you how amazing YaST, their "control panel", is. There's definitely some stuff to get used to, like patterns and zypper. But, for a set and forget system, it's hard to beat IMO.

Debian for my work. It is stable and I’ve been using it for many years.

Fedora! To me it sits right at the sweet spot of stability and bleeding edge (they call it "leading edge"), and I'm very happy with how they run things (including the most recent controversy!).

Fedora, really uptodate software, GNOME, stability of a server distro.

Currently NixOS having been a long time Arch user. The power of Nix is unbeatable once it finally clicks.

I keep hearing about NixOS, is it possible to leverage both NixOS and the AUR from arch?

Not that I’m aware of though it would be cool if possible. Thankfully everything I’ve needed has been found in NixOS Packages or Flathub as my last resort. My current setup if you’re curious.

Just skimmed my AUR install list, and yea most of them seem to be on there, good to know! If my laptop ever shits the bed, I'll give this a shot haha.

If you mean use both at the same time, you can! If you check out the website for Nix (or Guix, its Lispy cousin), instructions are provided for installing it alongside your current distro as an additional package manager for those who want to use it without reinstalling or using a vm.

NixOS user now. Long time fan of Arch with BTRFS and snapshots but Nix takes everything to the next level.

Arch Linux is my go-to distro because I can literally install it in half the time that it takes a lot of others. I also like that it is very lightweight.

Same here. I just get muddled up with all the other package managers. Tried Debian/Ubuntu a few times but always end up with a load of ppas and everything being a mess!

Debian -- The Universal Operating System

Because it's universal, runs on everything rock solid and stable.

Debian stable, the os for 50 year old nudists.

It’s the stable branch of one of the oldest distributions around.

I've always felt that Arch has the least amount of personal compromises. For "bleeding edge," it's also generally stable and has a wealth of community support and documentation.

I would highly recommend EndeavourOS. Its basically Arch linux on easy mode. It takes care of updates without much fuss.

EndeavourOS is definitely my favorite desktop distro I've used. I'm pretty heavy on command line because my brain likes it and I really enjoy the lack of any graphical package manager where you just have to use command line to update/install stuff. Feels very clean and I haven't had any stability issues that I haven't seen in other distros.

It's there no option to update things with a GUI or do you just prefer to use terminal. Currently trying to decide between mint and endeavor. Haven't used Linux since Ubuntu way back in college in like 2011

Nixos, as stable as debian and as rolling edge as arch and if i break something i can just rollback.

This man knows. My whole config is stored in github. Super easy to come back to a perfectly setup box or clone it on another machine.

Fedora.

I can highly recommend fedora to a newbie. It's easier to use than ubuntu. It doesn't come with snaps. You only need one or two methods of installing apps. It's safe. It's well written. It's supported very well. It's updated frequently. It incorporates innovative technology.

Opensuse and EndeaverOS are also very nice.

I've slowly over the last 16 years come all the way around to Fedora. I started with Ubuntu Feisty Fawn, explored Mint and then Debian, then played around with Arch, moved to Opensuse Tumbleweed when it began, and now all Fedora and Fedora derivatives.

I think the most interesting Fedora projects rn are the immutable desktops, Silverblue and Kinoite. I might consider testing out Opensuse MicroOS when the desktop versions are more stable.

Debian. I've been running it on my "daily driver" personal desktop/laptop since -97 (Debian 1.3).
Changing now would be major undertaking with no apparent upside, so I won't.

Arch for desktop, Debian for server

Tried a lot of distros and finally settled on openSUSE Tumbleweed. Rock solid for a rolling release. If anything ever goes wrong, there's Snapper to rollback without a breaking a sweat.

Pop! It's easy to install, stable, and works great with Nvidia drivers. If I have more time on my hands then Arch, because it's good old-fashioned computing fun.

For desktop Linux, I use Arch. It's a community driven base distribution, so the needs of the community are what drives development and there are no financial decisions of a company that get priority, which is refreshing. It also has access to the latest and greatest that Linux has to offer.

They have a philosophy of expecting basic effort from users and to have a tinkering mindset. Historically, Arch devs and users have a reputation of being grumpy greybeards, but many of the rough edges have been rounded off in the last few years. If you are willing to do a bit of reading or watching some YouTube videos, it's not really that hard.

You can really build a lean and powerful machine that has just the software you want on the system with Arch. All it takes is a little effort and willingness to ask for help from the community after you have tried and failed to solve problems yourself. It's really not the badge of elitism to use Arch in 2023. It's never been easier to use and doesn't blow up on you nearly as often as the reputation implies. Just use good hygiene and make snapshots so if you blow it up, it's only a 5 minute recovery.

Fedora Workstation is what I use for my desktop. If I were to have to reinstall now I'd do Silverblue.

For my home lab I do Proxmox with a couple of VM's for Ubuntu server for pihole DNS servers and an OpenMediaVault VM for my docker workloads. I'd probably do CoreOS or IoT if I was starting over there though.

Arch has been my go to for almost 10 years now, and it was one of my favorites for 5 years prior. These days I rarely have any issues from updating. I have to use Ubuntu for work and I dread every distribution upgrade. I got lucky and the last one worked on my work laptop, but usually something stupid breaks.

I run arch on my laptop, my previous laptop, and my server. The install on my server is 7 years old now, and started life with an entirely different CPU brand. I won't say I've never had to do any manual intervention, but the answer has been a Google search away pretty much every time.

I use Arch BTW

Try Void Linux, or just stay at Arch. If you want to try Nixos (my current distro), watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGVXJ-TIv3Y .

Arch and Debian. I have two home PCs with all my data on an smb share. One runs Debian 12, the other runs Arch. When I sit down I decide which I want to use and go. I couldn't pick one I liked better so....I didn't.

@pluja You'll be happiest using whatever you're comfortable maintaining/troubleshooting. I've spent ~20 years playing with many different distros for one reason or another and the only one I can't stay away from is #gentoo. As with most things, everyone's got different tastes, that's the great thing about having so much choice.

Nobody's reason for "the best" distro is gonna be the right one for you. You'll know what's right for you because it's the one you always want to use more than any other.

I’ve been itching to try Gentoo again after being away for many years. I remember setting up portage overlays to get Wine running CS 1.6 back in the day. I had done a stage1 install one time for the hell of it and it was faster than it ever was on Windows. I’ve been wanting to chase that sweet performance… funrollloops or something. Haha

I've tried basically every reasonably maintained distribution, and keep coming back to Arch. It just feels right. And it just works right too. The package manager is excellent, and that is one of the things that makes or breaks any distribution for me. I also love that it comes with nothing, so you know what you get, and it'll be setup how you want it. With other major distributions, I spend a considerable amount of time removing things first, which is something I just don't want to do.

I've been trying out NixOS recently. I really appreciate what it is trying to do, but the complexity of nix-command is quite overwhelming

Gentoo and Debian. Debian will let you get back to what you really want to be doing whereas gentoo gives you excellent granularity over everything, but can be overwhelming and time consuming.

Really should ask yourself what you'll be mostly doing and pick a tool (distro) that let's you accomplish that.

My daily driver is Linux Mint running Cinnamon. It doesn’t get in the way. Servers run Debian stable.

Endeavour OS for me, use it both on my own laptop and my work one. BTW, it's Arch-based

i settled on fedora kde a few years ago(altho i recently switched to fedora silverblue kde)
imo a nice middleground.

if you are intrested in immutable distros, i can recommend silverblue (not as drastic of a change compared to nixos)

if you are intrested in nixos package management, you might want to try out the nix package manager on your current distro.

an intresting way to get the fresh but stable system you want is to,
install some rock solid distro like debian,
and then use the nix package manager and/or flatpacks to get the fresh software you want.

It used to be Fedora, and I still want it to be Fedora. It was solid, stable, cutting edge, and easy to work with both on the command line and in the super-up-to-date Gnome desktop. DNF is great once you make a few tweaks, I don't care about systemd, and it supports all of my hardware with basically no tweaking right out of the box. And the Anaconda Installer isn't all that bad once you get used to its idiosyncrasies. I've been a distrohopper for like 15 years now, but I always end up hopping back to Fedora. Or I did, anyway, but with IBM-RedHat's shenanigans as of late, I'm looking for a new home. Current thoughts:

  • I used to run Arch (btw), and could go back to it, but I'd prefer something more brainless to maintain (Arch isn't hard to maintain - check updates before you install, be careful with the AUR, it's golden - but I just don't have the spoons anymore). It's actually what I'm running on the laptop I'm using to post this.

  • I'm not going to use Ubuntu or anything else involving Snap because I hate dealing with Snap (YMMV - I know it has its fans, but I don't like the way Canonical is handling it's stuff there, and I only have room in my depression-addled brain for one universal package format).

  • I love the new Debian, but the Gnome desktop is already out of date, and it's just going to get farther behind. I have to decide if I want to give up cutting edge Gnome in favor of holy-Mary-Mother-of-God stability.

  • Some up and coming immutables look very interesting; blendOS and Vanilla OS in particular, but also OpenSuse Aeon. Just not sure I'm ready to go immutable, old grognard that I am.

But seriously, RHEL - just re-open the source code, thanks, you asshats.

Edit: I really need to learn how to proofread before I post.

As a Fedora user, I don't understand why you care this much about RHEL? I agree the decision is very bad, but Fedora is downstream from RHEL and

  1. Is not owned by Redhat (although they are it's sponsor)
  2. Will never go closed source, as it is community run and this would infinitely degrade the quality of RHEL.

If you really prefer using Fedora, I think the paywalling of RHEL's sourcr code has little to no affect on you.

You make good points. My jumping off the Fedora ship was a knee-jerk reaction to the RHEL doofusry, and not one based completely on rational thought, sadly. And now I've been hopping around spending more time researching stuff and trying things out than getting things done lol.

So yeah. I might just go back to Fedora...

Yeah, I almost distrohopped for the same reason!

Even if you do go back to Fedora, you're a more experienced user than you were before.

Maybe you can help me. I have a computer hooked to my TV. The usage is 99% displaying YouTube and 1% displaying other internet content. It is running Mint. Getting YouTube to come up takes an eternity. I'm wondering if a different distro would fix this. If so, which one would be best? I need it to run Firefox well because I want to use the ad blocker. Ideas?

I would not expect another distro to fix this, unless the computer's hardware is very old or very slow. If that is the case, I would try to combine an extremely lightweight window manager with an extremely lightweight distro.

Well yeah, the hardware was thrown together from stuff I already had. It plays fine, it just takes forever to start. I suppose I could update the mobo/cpu.

I use Pop!_OS on my desktop and laptop. Prior to that, I would distro-hop like it was my job. I bought a system76 laptop and figured, why not. So, I had Pop preloaded on it instead of Ubuntu. Here's the reason I ended up settling on Pop as my one-and-only distro.

  • Based off Ubuntu/Debian, which I am most familiar/comfortable with

  • No Snaps

  • Flatpak supported out of the box

  • Relatively rapid deployment of updated kernels (currently on 6.2.6), so no need to worry about hardware support

  • Tiling windows that are well implemented

  • Backed by a company, but one that shares the same values as me

  • Stable, even with semi-rolling release nature of it

The downsides are that their choice of colors are god-awful. I get it, it's their company's colors, but I don't think it looks really all that good on an operating system. I've gotten used to it, and don't care as much anymore.

I've been on Pop for a couple of years now (?3), I just keep upgrading, and nothing breaks. It has all the applications I need, no snaps, I'm very familiar with ubuntu/debian systems, and it just keeps ticking along. Usually I'd distrohop when whatever I was using would crap out, but Pop just keeps trucking along

Gentoo, for its user choice and lack of bloat. I've been using it for a long time, and can create my own packages for personal use if I don't mind them looking like Frankenstein bodges, so that's another plus. It's stable enough if you stick with actual stable-marked packages and don't go out of your way to shoot yourself in the foot, and if something does go wrong at the distro's end, 1. they usually fix it pretty fast and 2. rolling packages back is easy if the older version is still in the tree (and usually still possible if it isn't, although it can get kind of involved).

Would I recommend Gentoo to another user? That depends on which user. You kind of have to be either knowledgeable or willing to learn—it isn't a "just works" distro, although some things have been streamlined in recent years. You do have to put a little time into maintenance, but it's usually on the order of less than half an hour a week.

Also, the excellent documentation and helpful user base makes it quite possible to learn your way around the system from install and onwards.

Fedora because it's robust, stable, mature and has a fairly up-to-date package repository. Plus, it has spins (ISO flavours) with different DEs/WMs installed, including i3 and even Sway!

If you want a Linux distro that just works and gets out of the way, Fedora is for you. I've been using it for years now and see no reason to switch.

I think I enjoy using Manjaro more than Fedora but I always end up back on Fedora because it just works correctly all the time

Same here, Tried about 10 distros and always end back with Fedora.

Been using it full time on my 2 desktops, and 2 laptops for 2 years now without ever thinking about trying another distro.

Anything Arch, because it's hard, it's a pain in the ass and as an intermediate user I need Arch to break on me so I can fix it and learn.

While Arch does allow a user to do a lot, including breaking their system, I would note that it's not a herculean task to build and run a stable machine. I broke my Arch system a few times by going against best-practices and it did teach me about some risks, but I knew exactly what I did and why it broke every time. It taught me how to quickly recover, which is good to know for any OS.

I'd call myself an intermediate enthusiast and I don't have a career that uses Linux, but I have never found Arch "hard". It just takes some reading and a little patience. The Arch Wiki has a majority of the answers, but if you have tried and failed to find the answer you need, the community is extremely savvy and are there to help you. They just prefer you to dig into the wiki and try for yourself before asking for help.

I distro hopped a lot in the 2006-2011 era, and eventually settled on Arch. I like the initial simplicity, the wiki was and still is the best resource to this day, and anything I needed from the kitchen sink was accessible via the AUR. I've ended up using it on my workstations, work laptops, and personal machines ever since.

Does Arch have built in disk encryption?

I'm on Manjaro but I'm sick of having to unlock the LUKS drive encryption every time I start the computer

Isn't that the point of full disk encryption, to make sure you're authorised to boot? That at least is the behaviour on a Mac if you enable full disk encryption. Or do you mean every time you wake it from sleep?

Basically on Mac, your login password decrypts the drive which is what I'm hoping for with a Linux distro, rather than having to decrypt the drive and then log in

AFAIK, if you want disk encryption on Arch, you gotta set it up yourself (i.e. follow the wiki).

And last time I installed manjaro (couple years ago), the installer would let you decide whether you want disk encryption or not. So nobody is being forced to use it.

Then again, if you are tired of it, there likely is a way to effectively disable it for your current install. But most likely that will be quite a bit more involved that just unchecking it during install.

I do want disk encryption enabled, I just find the boot & login process on Manjaro a little clunky and I've heard its a little simpler on other distros.

I do want disk encryption enabled, I just find the boot & login process on Manjaro a little clunky and I've heard its a little simpler on other distros.

Unpopular opinion: Antix Linux for workstation, because:

  1. It's Debian
  2. Very lightweight (100mb on RAM)
  3. Live to RAM
  4. Frugal installation
  5. Small size ISO (1gb) with full function utility
  6. Flexibel recovery, from old to modern system
  7. Responsive (no systemd)
  8. Retro-kind WM (icebox-wm), perfectly match on retro system
1 more...

zorin. im just so lazy. Every so often I try something else looking for something easier. I would really like to use cubeos but likely not going to happen. oh and sourcemage and maybe once im retired.

Arch for me, I use Aur as a crutch to avoid compiling and managing source projects, i love pacman and rolling releases, and it's very easily customizable (ofc once you learn the system).

I wish I could have the AUR without the rolling release, or more realistically I use arch without utilitizing the rolling release. I'm on such shitty + spotty + capped at 100gb I only update my system once a month. Haven't had problems though, so I guess im not complaining. Updating my windows VMs is significantly worse

Used to be Arch, now I shill for Debian.

What put you off Arch? I just started using it on an old (2015 era) notebook and it seems pretty decent so far

Nothing really. Arch is still great, I just kept having stuff happen where I’d suddenly find out there was a new bug in something at inopportune times. Just the nature of being bleeding edge. Nothing broke severely, but like if you want to join a Zoom call or play a game with friends or something, having something break randomly that you have to fix, even if it just takes a quick search or 5 minutes of troubleshooting can get tiresome.

Also, all of the customization stuff that Arch allows is not as appealing to me anymore since my skill level with Linux has reached a point where I can get super granular with pretty much any distro. Add to that flatpak reducing my need to depend on the AUR, and there you have it.

Void Linux. Super stable and offers an easy and lightning fast package manager. I'm not sure of your use case but it has been great for me on an older Dell precision laptop for work.

If you are looking for stability with latest updates, then Gentoo. But I won't recommend it to a distro hopper.

Besides than Arch and Mint are my general recommendation.

Debian is always my go-to. Is the users are coming from Windows I might say the DE to Cinnamon.

It depends on how you want your update cycle.

If you don't mind the rolling release type of updates where you get updates ASAP, EndeavourOS does the job nicely. It's based on Arch Linux like Manjaro, but unlike Manjaro it only uses its own repository for its own, distro-specific extra software, everything else is from Arch's repos. If you remember Antergos, it's basically the spiritual successor.

For those who want a stable update cycle, I would recommend either Linux Mint or Fedora. I've had a solid experience with Fedora, but my friends really like Mint as well.

For those who want to be able to mix and match stable and unstable packages, Gentoo is the way to go. The nature of its package management allows you to mix and match stable and unstable versions at your own leisure, at the cost of long compilation times. It depends on whether that's worth it for you, but it's worth mentioning.

Well I would have normally said Fedora but with the current RedHat issues I'm thinking of making a switch. but in my opinion Fedora was always rock stable and leading edge. currently looking at an alternative.

I am typically on Arch on all my machines since 2006. For a while I bootstrapped new machines using EndeavorOS, but usually stripped out their packages and returned to vanilla arch. Since I now prefer ZFS as root fs, I am back to installing from scratch, to get exactly the layout I want.

I've been using Garuda (arch derivative) for my home and work PC. It works how I want it to, I like that it has BTRFS as default for the file system, and the AUR is such an amazing resource I miss it whenever I use a different distro.

I have a production server that's using Alma at the moment, but with the RHEL news I'm thinking of switching it over to something else, but I'm not sure what yet. I've been using Ubuntu server for some test servers/projects and I like it better than Alma but it still hasn't given me that "wow" factor I feel with Arch so I'm not sure what I'm going to do there...

If I had to choose, I'd go with openSUSE Tumbleweed. It's a solid distro overall. Arch, Debian and Mint are close though! I've been thinking to check out NixOS and Garuda for a while, but I haven't had the time for that yet.

I tried quite a few of distros and I keep on going back to Fedora. A lot of things come out of the box such as Flatpak, it won't pester you about the password when you just want to install a app and i barely find myself solving issues with command line.

My other two favorites are Mint and Pop, i can recommend these to beginners and I really just like a good out of the box experience, avoiding command line where possible. Are there others that tick these boxes?

I’m running NixOS on my laptop and I really like it though I haven’t been able to get Resilio going. It’s challenging sometimes but when I have things the way I want them I have a great sense of order. So it’s the most satisfying Linux I’ve tried.

Have you tried syncthing?

No I haven’t. You recommend it? I’ve otherwise been happy with Resilio for years.

I've been using Syncthing for a couple years and it works pretty well. Haven't tried Resilio but the main difference afaik is that Syncthing doesn't have an iOS client and Resilio isn't open source.

You tried most of them. You found Arch enjoyable, so I'd stick to that for the Wiki, the community, and flexibility.

NixOS looks interesting too, but nothing beats Arch in terms of having so much software at one-click distance with the almighty AUR.

I've been using Arch Linux as a daily driver for about two years I believe. As with any other distribution, it depends on the user's preferences, experience and needs, whether or not I'll recommend them Arch.

What I like the most about Arch is the customization from the ground up, the rich, detailed and yet user-friendly Arch Wiki, the AUR (although one shouldn't depend on it too much) and that after the installation everything seems more trouble-free than the distributions I've tried before. Arch almost never broke for me and even then fixing the issues weren't a big problem. It's not as difficult as it is often portrayed.

Nor is it as easy as it is often portrayed. A new user could be comfortable starting with Arch Linux, but it doesn't hurt to have experienced another distribution that is intended to be user-friendly.

Having spent years on Gentoo and done several installs, installing Arch the other day was a wall in the park and felt natural. I had to learn the new tech stack (nmcli, pacman, arch-chroot) but after that it was basically easy mode. You mean I don’t have to define compiler flags and feature flags and I don’t have to wait for it to compile or set up a cross arch compiler farm?

1 more...
1 more...

Personally, I've been running Debian everywhere (both on my servers and for desktop use) for a few years and I've found it much more reliable than Ubuntu. Sure, the repos tend to be somewhat out-of-date (unless you're on testing, which I've started using more and more and have yet to experience any actual problems with), but most of the time it makes no difference and if I really need the latest version of something I can just spin up a Docker container.

Not to long ago I would of said Fedora but recently I've switched to OpenSUSE Tumbleweed and I'm really enjoying it. Still learning the ins and outs though.

I'm using Arch simply because of familiarity and comfort in using it. That and pacman being fast usually helps me make up my mind whenever I try something else. I really hadn't experienced any major breakage in any of the packages in the standard repos, especially if everything is configured correctly. So I don't really have anything to say against Arch's stability.

I also hear good things about Tumbleweed, so that could be an alternative and more complete out-of-box package, but that also highly depends on how comfortable you'll be with openSUSE's way of doing things.

It all boils down to how you prefer to configure and manage your system and its packages, really. Nothing much more than that. As long it does the job, it's usually fine.

pacman is so fast. I love Fedora but dnf is such a chugger

Yep, especially on a slow machine, it can be very noticeable.

Although I think I remember reading about some dnf optimizations that can be applied to help the slowness.

I’ve hopped around to a bunch of different distros, but I always return to Debian Stable. I don’t really need the most bleeding-edge packages for my system, due to my use case.

Most of my actual apps are installed via Flatpak, so they’re all pretty recent, while still being on a rock-solid stable distribution.

I searched for years. Nothing really clicked... I've finally settled on ParrotOS. Their flagship is a pen testing distro like Kali, but they have a home distro as well, I've been using it for quite some time.

Stability is huge for me, and regular updates. Privacy focused, based on Debian.

Hope this helps your search :)

Linux Mint is my go-to. It's stable and if I want the latest update of anything, I use one of these:

  • PPA
  • Flatpak
  • Docker

I think people underestimate how useful docker can be for running various stuff, I have few semi-permanent containers for some software and it works great.

As a Linux noob: what's Docker?

It's a containers system. It's similar to a virtual machine, you can run so-called images, which are a copy of the virtual machine that are hosted on the internet. For example, to run a mysql server: docker run -it --name mysql -p 3306:3306 mysql:8. This will run an interactive container (-it) called mysql (--name mysql) which will run the version 8 of mysql (the image name and version, mysql:8) which will forward the port 3306 from container to the port 3306 on your host PC (-p 3306:3306). You can have multiple containers, so for example multiple mysql versions (they can't have the same host port if they're running at the same time).

I use NixOS on my main PC.

If you want to use NixOS, you have to be willing to read.

Two things are especially difficult:

Coding: You will have to learn the Nix-specific way for everything you do. How does Nodejs work in NixOS? How does GCC work in NixOS? How does my IDE work in NixOS?

Using unofficial packages: The nix repos are very large and you'll most likely find everything you need there (or on flatpak/flathub). But if something isn't there, the easiest way tends to be packaging it as a nix package yourself. And that's something many people probably don't want to do.

The coding thing is annoying enough that I may switch away from NixOS at some point.

Other than that, NixOS is great.

I'm trying to solve problem with coding in NixOS with Distrobox and Archlinux container with all the tools for development. Work fine for me.

I use Arch Linux on my desktop and laptop. My servers run a mix of Debian and OpenSUSE.

On my desktop I run Debian 12 (stable) and on my old laptop I have been playing around with Peppermint OS.

Fedora is my daily driver.

I install Ubuntu LTS for family/friends, as the more stable software makes supporting them easier, and they should have a few years of no major problems if I get hit by a truck.

Void linux, but if you're somewhat savvy and don't mind spending some time fixing your flow in the beginning, Gentoo/Funtoo is a nice flex

Xubuntu for "I need this to just work" daily driving, and assorted other stuff for screwing around with. I like the idea of immutable OSes and have considered silverblue and am watching the development of vanillaos...

Xubuntu has been my go-to so I installed 23.04 on both my wife's new computer, her netbook and our htpc recently. Turns out it ships with a broken xfce4-screensaver that crashes when you try to unlock the computer and you get stuck (unless you switch to a virtual console and kill the process). A xubuntu dev was helpful and directed me to a ppa that had a patched version, but I was still surprised that such a central feature wasn't working.

In addition there appears to be some kind of screen blanking that I haven't been able to disable. At first I just turned off the screen saver and all power saving features in the control panel, but the htpc would still turn off the monitor if left alone for some time, and then refuse to turn it back on unless I switched back and forth between virtual terminals while the TV was turned off. It got a little bit better after uninstalling xfce4-power-manager, and now the screen can be woken by moving the mouse, but it shouldn't turn off at all since it's supposed to be disabled.

I hope they manage to sort all those things out. I used Xubuntu for 5+ years with almost no issues.

Yeeeerah, I tried 23.04 too and was surprised how buggy bits of it are. I had screensaver issues too, though not quite as bad. I never could manage to get the notification widget to actually work. I gave up and dropped back to 22.04 LTS.

Fedora XFCE, The only 2 times I ever have to touch the command line are for flatpak and for updateing, so I am not sure if I would recomend the XFCE spin, but I would recomend Fedora, probably the KDE, only because I for what ever reason cannot stand Gnome, I do not know why, but I just cannot get my workflow to work with gnome

VanillaOS is pretty neat. It has an immutable (kind of) OS, lets you choose which package formats you want to use (flatpak, snap, appimage, etc) and leverages containers (a la Distrobox) and their package manager Apx to give you seamless access to packages on other distros. It's Ubuntu-based right now but the next release is switching to debian.

To be fair, I don't have much time on it. My daily drivers are a chromebook and a steamdeck, but I did dust off an old laptop just to check it out for a little bit.

In general, Ubuntu is my go-to when I just want something that works and is reasonably stable. Just pick the spin with the Desktop Environment that you like. I'm using KDE Neon (I realize Neon isn't an Ubuntu flavor or spin) on my daily driver laptop, and Ubuntu MATE on my desktop. I also have an old netbook that usually gets Xubuntu, but currently has Fedora 37 XFCE as an experiment.

It sure is nice that we have to option to distro-hop, either on bare metal or in a VM.

Fedora. Mainly because I work at a RHEL shop and I want a daily driver that is somewhat similar to my work environment.

The recent RHEL drama hasn't changed any of that?

Not really. As I understand it, RHEL is restricting access to the source code of proprietary things they developed. Does it go against open source principles? Sure. Does it make sense from a business perspective? Absolutely. I was actually surprised that this wasn't the case before.

Xubuntu - great ootb configuration, lightning fast on my old thinkpad without compromising on functionality

unless we're talking about my main machine, which runs gentoo, i'll always default to alpine. super solid base system and packages. super accessible when it comes to upstreaming packages. I only wish they had s6 as an option for init/service manager

I have been a Linux user since the Red Hat Halloween release (back in the twentieth century) and have run SUSE, Slackware, Red Hat, Arch, Debian and countless of their forks. Currently I'm settled on Pop!_OS 22.04 NVIDIA for my daily driver laptop with a built-in Nvidia GPU. It is rock solid and can run my three displays, each with a different resolution and refresh rate, without ever missing a beat. For everything else I use Debian and most of my clients run either RHEL or Oracle SEL on their production servers.

TL;DR: Pop!_OS daily driver and Debian for everything else.

I keep coming back to Fedora and I used to hate GNOME but I've learn to appreciate it "just working out of the box". I used to be config tweaker master but now appreciate things just working for the most part without me touching it.

I've been using MX, formerly known as Mepis, for over 15 years now. It's the most stable release I've ever used, and their repos are pretty up to date. The community is great also.

Go to? Probably Mint. Such a good distro. Unfortunately I recently joined camp KDE Plasma and no other desktop environment can even compare.
I'm on Fedora KDE now. Solid distro for now at least.
If I need to return to monkee: EndeavourOS

EndeavourOS is the way! 😎😉 It's my daily driver, coming from Linux Mint.

Don't yell but Fedora/Ubuntu was my first exposure to Linux so I'm prejudiced toward them. I didn't have a lot of exposure to 'nix in the 90s since the family only had Windows.

draft - am I allowed to type "chromeos"

I mean you are allowed to, I just will have lots of questions, starting with Why, and moving on to no really why.

So I use Arch for my personal work. I never had a problem with stability. I've also started to be interested in NixOS, but I'm gonna just use it as an Server OS, I feel like it makes sense with the infrastructure as code implications.

Lubuntu my beloved. Ubuntu enough for me to google myself out of anything but lightweight enough to make me feel good about what I'm spending cycles/battery on... and familiar enough that I don't need to learn a whole new desktop paradigm when all I'm gonna do with the desktop gui is start an app anyway.

Fedora for me as it seems to work the best for my hardware, will be moving to Kinoite when I get the chance. i already am using distrobox and Flatpak in general. Tried NixOS (with Root on ZFS) but couldn't get hp-wmi module to work on on it. I was having some problems with Opensuse Nvidia drivers (wakeup from suspend didn't work sometimes). The one thing I miss on Fedora, that Opensuse has is Full-Disk Encryption.

Fedora is best for almost anything tbh... I always love... Fedora... I don't know, probably I being too fanatics into it :)

I use Debian for servers. I recently began migrating from Arch on my desktops to NixOS. The shift from the fantastic Arch wiki documentation to the NixOS documentation was a huge stumbling block, but I got through it. It took a lot of time to get NixOS to a nice state on my main laptop, but once I did, installing it to my 2013 macbook air and configuring it to be exactly like my main laptop took all of 15 minutes. That was a huge deal for me. The next hurdle is going to be installing it on my desktop with nvidia GPU, but I don't expect it will take too long.

I'll probably start migrating servers to NixOS where I can, too.

Here is my NixOS config repo, if that helps: https://github.com/thejevans/nix-config/

openSuse. After my years of distro hopping ended over a decade ago I settled on openSuse Leap and never switched to something else again. It's reliable and gives me the least bullshit. And by now it's the one I have the most experience in.

//edit
Leap on my server and tumbleweed on my work laptop but Leap would be sufficient there, too.

Alpine Linux, repositories contain most software for a desktop and server, minimal base system, fast package manager. I would only recommend it to an advanced user that does not use proprietary software as most of it will not run because it is linked against glibc but alpine linux uses musl libc.

Solus - get updates all the time, don't have to think about reinstalling and don't have to pay attention if an update could break my system

Void Linux is the way to go, I've been using it for a few years now with no issues. Currently gaming with arch but I was gaming on void for a while, before I decided to hop. Might go back but switching over is such a hassle at the moment.

I semi-regularly distro-hop, but Xubuntu is the distro I keep coming back to between hops to take a break or when one goes (temporarily) dormant. It's currently running on my primary server/linux machine.

Reasons: 1.) It's light on resources 2.) It's very simple and clean. 3.) It works with all the programs I use regularly; only one needs to be hand-compiled (but that one has to be compiled for literally any Linux machine). 4.) I know it. Scrub/partition/install/configure in under an hour. I can pick up any of my projects again immediately where I left off.

Right now I use pop_os. I bought a System76 laptop so it came with it. I like it because most things just work and I am lazy. Not the biggest gnome fan though. Previous to owning this laptop I tinkered with many distros but usually leaned towards lightweight DEs like xfce.

I've been toying with the idea of getting one of those. Would you do it again? Do you have any regrets or maybe wish you'd installed it on something else?

Debian and Mint are my favorites. I love the included games in Debian, the UI for both (Using cinnamon), and their ease of use.

I use Arch because it is generally the easiest one I've found to pretend it's 2010 again. Most Linux distributions are fine, but they've all been busy trying to solve problems I don't have and accepting that some niche corner cases are fine to break. I'm just a niche corner case in general.

I have nothing against Wayland trying to modernize the UI stack, but if their answer to half the things I need is "well the compositor should do that" and the compositor doesn't in fact do that yet, then I don't want to use Wayland yet. I have nothing against Flatpak trying to modernize application packaging, but their current story for making applications available from a shell is effectively "why do you want to do that", and well...I do want to do that, so I guess I don't really want to use Flatpak yet.

That's just me. Like I said...I'm a corner case. I understand that everyone else wants their computer to be an appliance that does what most people need without requiring any tinkering. And I'm not opposed to getting rid of the need to tinker. I'm too old to view tinkering to make something work as I thing I look forward to. I just view tinkering as a one-time cost with perpetual returns. I'm OK editing an xkb file to make some obscure input device work the way I want it to, because that might take me an afternoon, and then I just have that device do exactly what I want for the rest of its life with no further effort. Make it so that I never have to edit another xkb file again and I'll be just fine. But you can't do it by just saying, "no more needing xkbcomp because it doesn't work anymore, and if you needed it, go see if the compositor vendor will write some code for you".

U want stability stick to debian, bleeding egde apps? NixOs.

Middle ground? Ubuntu Rolling, u get reasonable up to day updates, and reasonable stability.

And remember, the perfect distro is the one u configure, and personalize for u. The distro is only gonna make ur life easier in making it urs, but that's all, I wasted a lot of time understanding this.

An immutable OS with flatpak, snap or appimage :

Fedora silverblue, nixos, vanilla os, guix, steam deck...

While there is still lot limitation using only flatpak, snap or appimage, i believe that in the next decade they will slowly grow and end up that packaging nightmare.

So we can have an OS up to date, latest app without worrying any breakage. But i'm not well versed and dunno if people and dev will follow that road.

I think it's time to ditch apt, dnf, rpm, aur. I imagine it would ease dev work but i'm not sure.

I use Gentoo for my daily driver, and Debian for servers.

I use Pop_OS because I really like having so much much GUI control via the keyboard. I'm patiently waiting for Cosmic to update things a bit.

Manjaro - because everyone else seems to only be voting for Arch itself here. Manjaro is actually very stable, but I did sometimes have some trouble with AUR updates clashing. I like it because it stays relatively up to date and I don't have to do any major reinstalls or upgrades. I've been on it for a few years and never have lost data or was not able to get it started (even if it did need a manual kick-start once or twice). Like any distro, over time you become savvy around what to use and what to avoid.

I thought we're supposed to just mention what we're using and why. Should we also tell others why they should not use what they're using? That could start the distro wars all over again, just when we all became united in our differences ;-)

I use Manjaro only because it makes others upset.

Also, I installed it a few years back and it just keeps working fine for me.

Ubuntu because it's Linux Easy-Mode

I would only recommend it to Windows users looking to start using Linux. The average Linux user is a lot more tech-literate than me and can use the more difficult but more customizable and streamlined distros, and the average Windows user has no chance on Linux, not even Ubuntu which was already a lot of work for me to switch to

Anything Arch, because it's hard, it's a pain in the ass and as an intermediate user I need Arch to break on me so I can fix it and learn.

Fedora, although I dislike SELinux and I think they should have a less strict policy with regards to FLOSS. Like, I prefer FLOSS over proprietary software, but I just wish they'd be a bit more pragmatic and allow both on the default repos and just leave it up to the user to decide what to use and what not. I guess that would also prevent dilemmas like the recent hardware acceleration drama?

Otherwise I like their balance between stability and being up to date, fast update cycle and the large amount of available packages.

mint for my laptop running awesomewm and lightened it up a bit - To have a no-thrills always works never complaints machine.

fedora server edition plus awesomewm for my desktop

I use manjaro, if you like the up-to-dateness of arch, with the polish and ease of setup of popos, it may be a great candidate for you.

1 more...

Daily drive Gnentoo, not sure if I could ever wholeheartedly recommend it since it's not really accessible for beginners...

If I need a VM I'd probably spin up an Arch or Alpine since they are relatively minimal & are not that difficult to set up once you're familiar with stuff (well Arch is one-command setup now). For servers... pretty much Debian always since that's what everyone supports

Stability-wise... I guess it depends on what type of "stability" I want? If I meant stability by having stable programming environments then it's not compatible with having new updates, Debian probably would be best for that. If I meant stability by the system not breaking too often, then most rolling release distros are probably fine? Arch/Gentoo have a lot more room for user error which is probably where most of the instability comes from, but otherwise they typically don't have too many issues I believe. Fedora is great but there's been some issue with RHEL going close-source, so I guess some ppl won't want to support that endeavor

I love Kubuntu. Plasma reminds me of windows 10 layout which I prefer over the windows 11/ Mac drawer layout.

This is what I drive too, at work we have RHEL though, and we're required to use RHEL base images for our containers. UBI-minimal is small enough though

After my terrible experience with EndeavourOS and its atrocious community I'm distro hopping again. Currently having a bad time with Gnome Nobara, might try the KDE version but I do prefer something that doesn't require a reinstallation or complicated upgrade methods. Would be great it rolling distros wouldn't just self destruct though. Maybe I give OpenSUSE Tumbleweed a chance. I heard it is supposedly more stable.

What bad experience did you have with Endeavour and its community?

Well, the latest GRUB update bricked itself, not just for me but also others. I asked for help in their forums, as I am too stupid to chroot into encrypted btrfs filesystems, since the guides expect you to actually know what you're doing if you don't have a standard setup. A few community members then decided to troll & insult me and turn my support thread into a flame war instead. At the end a moderator closed it and removed pretty much everything to hide it away and said I should open another thread if I still wanted help. He sort of reprimanded them very slightly verbally but I don't think he took any actual action, so I decided that I don't want any more "help" and left.

The big irony of this case is also that the whole shit talking comes from the same people who constantly cry about Manjaro, but that thing ran for longer, with less issues and didn't actually suicided itself. I just switched myself because I wanted to change the file system and thought I'd try the highly praised EndeavourOS.

For OpenSUSE I'd need a bigger USB stick though, as I don't want to use the network image.

The blue A-shaped logo distro just clicked for me. Don't think I'll ever get tempted to wander.