Generally like Debian, don't particularly like systemd. So I thought I'd try it out. Seems pretty good so far, a bit easier than installing Debian then removing systemd.
NixOS on my laptop, my Hetzner dedicated server, and my EC2 instances.
Configuring NixOS is done declaratively, so I can easily inspect how my computers are configured, and I know that when I get a new computer, I can just copy the configuration.
Its way of performing upgrades and configuration changes is the new state of the art. You could say it's like React for your whole userland.
The configuration syntax and the package definition syntax are one and the same functional programming language, which makes the system very flexible. And the whole package hierarchy is just a Git repo.
The package server maintained by NixOS also happens to have binary builds for nearly all Haskell packages, which saves me a lot of time.
I'll also mention that EC2 can spin up a NixOS instance from an existing public AMI, which can be a convenient way to get started.
While reading up on the basic semantics of the Nix language, you can also poke around in the Nixpkgs repository on GitHub to see how packages are typically defined and composed.
And there's an IRC channel on Freenode that's nice and helpful.
With my desktop I have been on the Mandrake/Mandriva/Mageia bus for years, while solid and easy ( I do not like to solve puzzles with my desktop OS ) It became more and more appearant that they can't keep up, so parts of their distro are hopelessly outdated. Now I use an Arch based distro that is somewhat, but not very unstable, called Manjaro.
It is not as suave as the Mageia distro but it does have a really massive Arch knowledge base, if you google problems with some part of linux then 9 out of ten times you see Arch based problem solving as top links.
Debian testing. It's similar enough to Ubuntu that instructions and suggestions (e.g. how to get $program to work on Ubuntu) are generally still applicable. Packages are far more up-to-date than Debian stable. Rolling release means (almost) never having to perform a show-stopping upgrade or reinstall.
Xubuntu. It has a lot of support and community knowledge, since it is a *buntu distro, feels very snappy, never had stability issues and looks fine just out of the box, no tweaking required. I'm not motivated to look elsewhere, although if I do, I'll opt for XFCE again.
For servers I kinda prefer CentOS, but a lot of people around me prefer Ubuntu, so I usually use Ubuntu. I have no proper metrics around this, it's just a feeling.
I used to use Kubuntu. But trying to upgrade to the latest version was a nightmare (latter realizing it's because the distro is abandoned). Tried other KDE, ubuntu based distros - always the same story. Buggy as hell.
Finally listened to my friends and moved to arch. Manjaro (kde edition) has been fantastic. Yet to see a bug or non-functioning feature in >6 months of use.
Thinking of switching to tiling desktop tho.
How about Antergos, isn't it a better choice for new users? Technically it's just Arch and should just work. When I tried Manjaro I found it slightly confusing, also being shunned by Arch community for using it is a Majjor Majjaro drowback.
I haven't tried Antergos yet, but for me, Manjaro just worked out of the box. It's also technically just Arch, and I can't say I've ever experienced being shunned for using it. Sounds to me like you just had the unfortunate experience of running into some pricks on the internet. I can't see how said pricks would react any differently if you told them you were running Antergos... (But if it persists, perhaps you'd find it easier to just say you're running Arch. :)
Ubuntu. Back in the day I only had access to really expensive and painfully slow Internet connection. Ubuntu was the only distro I could get my hands on thanks to Canonical's free CD shipping program. It mostly just works and I've stuck with it ever since.
Arch Linux.
Why?: It's simple and how you want it to be. The wiki is great and the Arch Repo is great. With AUR and official repo, you will never need to look elsewhere for packages and it's very simple, unlike, Ubuntu's PPA.
And, even with the rolling release, it's pretty stable.I used Ubuntu previously and had a lot of problems with stability. I have been more than a year now on archlinux.
That's pretty much my sentiment on Arch, too. I have another point, however, that is also very important to me:
If I break something, I can fix it. Guaranteed. That's not completely due to the experience you gather doing the "manual installation of everything" dance, but also due to how this process works. I've never had to reinstall my Arch system - there's always a way to save a botched installation.
As someone who likes to tinker with my systems sometimes (and who's reinstalled more screwed up Ubuntu/Fedora setups than I can count), that is really valuable to me.
Yeah, it's really easy to fix things in Arch. Once, during 'pacman -Syyu' install, the linux kernel didn't install correctly and left the system broken. I just chrooted via a Arch live USB and reinstalled linux and was good to go again. This kind of issues hasn't happened since.
Around 2 years ago, I wanted to tinker and understand linux distros and have installed most of them. But, when I tried Arch, I settled with it,no more tinkering.
However,I find it painful to install. I installed Arch successfully in third time.
Couldn't agree more (mostly on the part that Pacman and the AUR are amazing).
I was so intimidated by the whole "build your own system" philosophy, that I never tried, and it was only after asking on HN for advice[0] that I finally gave it a shot.
Software-wise the best decision of my life so far.
It also taught me that "RTFM" is often the best solution, and that man pages are there for a reason.
Sparky Linux. It's a Debian 9 based OS. It has all the benefits of Debian: stable and have the largest software compatibility. But makes it working out-of-the-box.
So in some way it's like Ubuntu but slimmer(faster) and more stable. I've tested so many distros and in the end Sparky (Debian9) is the most stable, fast and productive distribution on my hardware (dell rugged laptop).
I used to use Debian unstable because it had all the packages regular Debian was missing, but it was a bit, well, unstable. Then Ubuntu came out about 12 years ago and it was exactly what I had always wanted: a stable distribution of everything missing from Debian. Since then Ubuntu has been my default choice of Linux and the LTS versioning has served well for long-running servers.
Arch Linux. Once you know how to use it you never feel comfortable with Debian/Ubuntu. With AUR having every package under the sun and usually no dependency problems. A Wiki which is detailed and a minimal install I love it. I sometimes use Antergos so I don't need to deal with as many problems installing.
openSUSE Tumbleweed. Mainly because it runs on pretty much any hardware, has RPMs for everything, is easy enough to use, and updates easily. Also up to date with all the newest stuff, and bug free.
About 10 years ago I discovered Arch Linux, and never looked back. What I like most about it is that it comes with no bloat, you install exactly what you need.
I'm using it with i3wm, which is also a beautiful piece of software.
Fedora, you'll need to cope with GNOME if you want Wayland but the underlying distro is rock solid compared to what it was just a couple of years before. I'm surprised no-one mentioned Solus yet, to me it seems to be a runner up distro one should keep an eye on.
Arch linux, though the disk did not boot up the most recent attempt. Chosen for at that time a printable inclusive install howto [3 wiki parts, now less ] and a helpful forum both. Way before systemd though.
Ubuntu 16.04. It just works. Upgraded to 17.04-17.10 and had the dreaded issues which made me fall back on the tried and true. I don't recall all of them but they were painful.
53 comments
[ 4.5 ms ] story [ 102 ms ] threadGenerally like Debian, don't particularly like systemd. So I thought I'd try it out. Seems pretty good so far, a bit easier than installing Debian then removing systemd.
• Good package management + vendor repos.
• Sane defaults
• config packages: https://debathena.mit.edu/config-package-dev/
• truly community run
Reason: I can install it using wubi, can easily find solution if stuck, dabian based
Configuring NixOS is done declaratively, so I can easily inspect how my computers are configured, and I know that when I get a new computer, I can just copy the configuration.
Its way of performing upgrades and configuration changes is the new state of the art. You could say it's like React for your whole userland.
The configuration syntax and the package definition syntax are one and the same functional programming language, which makes the system very flexible. And the whole package hierarchy is just a Git repo.
The package server maintained by NixOS also happens to have binary builds for nearly all Haskell packages, which saves me a lot of time.
So far I've found this[0] which seems like a good introduction.
[0] https://ebzzry.io/en/nix/
The NixOS manual is also a good resource.
I'll also mention that EC2 can spin up a NixOS instance from an existing public AMI, which can be a convenient way to get started.
While reading up on the basic semantics of the Nix language, you can also poke around in the Nixpkgs repository on GitHub to see how packages are typically defined and composed.
And there's an IRC channel on Freenode that's nice and helpful.
Reason: It just works.
For servers I kinda prefer CentOS, but a lot of people around me prefer Ubuntu, so I usually use Ubuntu. I have no proper metrics around this, it's just a feeling.
Other than 5 minutes setting it up, everything was pretty much the same and I like DNF.
I used to use Kubuntu. But trying to upgrade to the latest version was a nightmare (latter realizing it's because the distro is abandoned). Tried other KDE, ubuntu based distros - always the same story. Buggy as hell.
Finally listened to my friends and moved to arch. Manjaro (kde edition) has been fantastic. Yet to see a bug or non-functioning feature in >6 months of use. Thinking of switching to tiling desktop tho.
If I break something, I can fix it. Guaranteed. That's not completely due to the experience you gather doing the "manual installation of everything" dance, but also due to how this process works. I've never had to reinstall my Arch system - there's always a way to save a botched installation.
As someone who likes to tinker with my systems sometimes (and who's reinstalled more screwed up Ubuntu/Fedora setups than I can count), that is really valuable to me.
Around 2 years ago, I wanted to tinker and understand linux distros and have installed most of them. But, when I tried Arch, I settled with it,no more tinkering. However,I find it painful to install. I installed Arch successfully in third time.
I was so intimidated by the whole "build your own system" philosophy, that I never tried, and it was only after asking on HN for advice[0] that I finally gave it a shot.
Software-wise the best decision of my life so far.
It also taught me that "RTFM" is often the best solution, and that man pages are there for a reason.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14437632
So in some way it's like Ubuntu but slimmer(faster) and more stable. I've tested so many distros and in the end Sparky (Debian9) is the most stable, fast and productive distribution on my hardware (dell rugged laptop).
It's a source-based distribution similar to Gentoo but far, far simpler.
And that's why I use it: It's simple.
It also has a great community. :)
Been using Linux 20 years so at this point, the distro is just back ground noise for me.
I'm using it with i3wm, which is also a beautiful piece of software.