HN Explorer

Ask HN: What is your Linux distro of choice?

24 points by rukshn ↗ HN
Hi,

I've switched from Windows to Linux (Mint) year ago, as it's one of the most easiest distro to start with.

I'm fascinated about Arch Linux but not sure I can build it from ground up yet.

But I'm just curious to know what Linux distro you guys are using, so at is your Linux distro?

55 comments

[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 98.7 ms ] thread
paulhauggis
CentOS on the server, Ubuntu on the desktop.
tux
Arch Linux + XFCE on desktops/laptops, and Ubuntu LTS on servers.

I've also, switched from Windows XP/7 to Ubuntu then Linux Mint. Used Linux Mint for about a week and found Arch Linux. Been using Arch ever since. If you need help with setting up Arch see official wiki @ https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Beginners%27_guide But if you're a beginner in Linux world I would recommend you start with "Manjaro Linux" which is based on Arch Linux. It has graphical installer and works out of the box. Between, I think Manjaro Linux website has moved to https://manjaro.github.io/

I've also wrote a post last year on how to install Arch Linux. But I highly recommend the above official wiki instead.

http://www.distrogeeks.com/arch-linux-2014-install/

cache in case the site down because of Hacker News lol

http://web.archive.org/web/20150425182255/http://www.distrog...

svennek
After many (many) years of Gentoo, I switched to Arch. Have never looked back... (both servers and desktops)
tux
I run Arch server on local network for development but for production server its not a good idea. Because Arch is rolling release you will have to update and reboot your server a lot. Unless you are okay with using obsolete packages, which defeats the purpose of rolling release.
Ygg2
Xubuntu. It is the only Linux distro that runs smoothly in my VM.
vezzy-fnord
Slackware. It's the only distro that has never let me down or broken down on me in any significant way. Its highly vanilla, conservative and generally component-agnostic nature means you can fling and perform just about all sorts of ugly hacks (which you need to do a lot in the Linux world anyway) on it without your system being holistically affected in any notable way.

I stopped caring about my WM a while ago and mostly just use Fluxbox with some small menu tweaks.

progman
What about security updates? Are they as easy to maintain as in Debian and Ubuntu?

I used Slackware at the very beginning of my Linux time in the 90s, and I really liked it. Now I am considering to use it again in face of Debian's non-optional move to systemd.

Ronsenshi
Xubuntu 12.04 on my dev machine. Would switch to 14.04, but reviews doesn't look very good.

Ubuntu 14.04 LTS on all of the servers.

rukshn
Yah I tired Xubuntu 14.04 before going with Mint for couple of days and it is not good
pan69
Which reviews? I have been using both 14.04 and 14.10 on my desktops without issues. Soon I'll be switching to 15.04.
Ronsenshi
Just some videos on YouTube. It's been quite a while, so can't say anything specific besides that those particular reviews weren't very positive.
timbit42
Xubuntu 14.04 is working well for me on three systems.
moopling
I had a very minimal amount of linux knowledge before jumping into arch as a distro: been using it for just over a year now and it was definitely a great choice. The best thing about arch in my opinion is the wiki, it has pretty much everything you need to know as to how to install and configure most any packages. I cannot understate how much I have learnt about linux from the many, many hours spent reading the wiki.

That said, it is a massive time sink. The first couple of weeks I spent pretty much all my spare time trying to get something usable, and it was probably a couple of months before I preferred my setup to, say, windows (which is what I had been using up to that point).

rukshn
Yah that's what I was also wondering, installing a desktop environment, drivers, all from the command-line no matter how familiar I'm with the terminal is something I'm afraid to try. Also I don't think I can install deb apps on Arch if I'm not mistaken
moopling
Having access to another computer while you are setting up really helps. Have the wiki up for cross reference until you have a desktop environment. You can't use debs, but that isn't important as arch has a really nice package manager which makes it very easy to install anything from the official repos. Installing user maintained packages from the AUR is more tricky, but again there is the wiki.

Once you know the ropes there are a couple of packages you can install to make installing from the AUR easier (like yaort, or pacaur), but you should really know how to do it yourself before relying on these tools.

tux
Actually, there is many deb apps in AUR repos. I haven't found any app that I wanted to install that is not in official or AUR repos yet. Also, creating your own AUR package and compiling it is fairly easy.
geoka9
Debian, both desktop and servers. I find it very convenient to have the same distro everywhere, and Debian is very well suited for it.
fierycatnet
Used to be Fedora/CentOS, now it's Ubuntu with MATE. I think I still prefer Red Hat but Ubuntu makes it a bit easier for development, and a lot of servers tend to use Ubuntu.
jab416171
A few years ago, I was exposed to the RHEL family and haven't looked back. I run CentOS on servers and Fedora on desktops/laptops.
atmosx
Gentoo, but I never use it anymore, because I don't have time (to compile and customise everything).
captn3m0
Currently on Ubuntu + Cinnamon, but plan to switch back to elementary freya soon.
troels
I used Ubuntu on the desktop/laptop for a couple of years, before switching to mac. I still use Ubuntu extensively on server side environments.
300
Gentoo with i3 window manager. As a sys admin, I like to build my own setup from ground up, and know exactly what I have installed.
[dead] ProNoob13
Debian server with LXDE.
DanBC
For various unfun technical reasons Fedora20 on a broken MacBook Pro. It's sub-optimal. It's surprisingly, alarmingly, buggy. It's also a poor combination of hardware / software. I'd probably be happier with something else, and I'm saving up to get a different computer. At which point I'll be using FreeBSD (EDIT: although the last time I used FreeBSD it was version 5) and possibly Arch (although I don't want to update it (other than security updates) frequently so I'm not sure Arch would be the best choice. Linux From Scratch would probably be better but I'd need to set aside some time to learn and do.

People often ask about the distro when really other things are probably more important for most people. Things like the desktop environment or package manager probably have more impact.

leaveyou
I go with the flow.. Ubuntu Server LTS on servers and Ubuntu Unity on desktops. I started with Zorin OS, then Ubuntu, then Xubuntu for a while, then I checked Mint, Debian, Lubuntu, Kubuntu, FreeBSD and PCBSD (I even nearly installed ArchLinux :) ) for short and very short periods of time and then I settled on plain Ubuntu for the most satisfaction with the least head ache.
teach
Same. I spent enough time recompiling kernel modules in the 1990s; I've gotten all that out of my system. I just want a system with sane defaults that mostly works. Just (~10 minutes ago) upgraded to Ubuntu 15.04 and I leave it alone.

Mind you, this is for a desktop machine built from parts. If I could justify the purchase I'd buy a Mac laptop and use Mac OS on that.

abruzzi
RHEL for my servers. I don't use Linux on a desktop, OSX instead.
darkstar999
Linux Mint, it's like the good ol' day of Ubuntu.
larzang
Mint. I need Sublime + terminals + browsers to work, anything else is gravy, and Mint does the best job of providing sane defaults and making it easy to change the few minor things I do.

15 years ago I didn't mind spending hours (days weeks) tweaking config files to get everything about my distro absolutely perfectly customized, now I just want it to work out of the box and get out of my way so I can get real work done.

Cinammon also has the nicest workspace management of any desktop environment I've tried, which is a solid bonus since it's probably the DE-specific feature I interact with most on a day to day basis.

ninjin
Lubuntu for my desktop, Ubuntu is still runs an excellent package ecosystem, but the window manager just took a wrong turn. LXDE is simple and behaves just like a window manager has behaved for ages, nothing fancy. Ubuntu LTS for servers, it is very stable and still has an excellent package ecosystem.

For my desktop, my history is DOS, Win 3.11, Win ME, Win XP, Gentoo, FreeBSD, Ubuntu, and Lubuntu. For servers, Gentoo, FreeBSD/OpenBSD, and Ubuntu LTS/OpenBSD. I use OpenBSD for network installations such as gateways.

faragon
Ubuntu and Fedora. Not because being the "bests", but because having better hardware support (from my point of view).
tanderson92
I have been using Exherbo for about 5 years fulltime and never looked back. It is a vanilla source-based distro with a focus on flexibility and users who know what they are doing. I would recommend people check out what it is about if that is appealing to you because there are tons of other great features (cross compiling handled natively by the package manager, good alternatives support, and binary package distribution). It is one of the few distros out there which is not just another theme on *buntu
hammerandtongs
Generally I'd discourage you from caring.

It's frequently that case that new users of Linux think there is something to be gained by "trying" (and continuously reinstalling) different Linux distributions.

The reality is that the software that makes up Linux (iirc there are 30k packages in Debian) is generally available across all of these distributions to a greater or lesser extent.

It's all the same software with relatively minor changes made to it to fit into the particular distribution.

You can use almost any desktop environment from any of these.

The underlying system software is aligning quite a bit these days as well with systemd.

Stick with a distribution.

When something goes wrong, try not to reinstall but instead figure out the problem and fix it.

Modify the system to your liking and in the process actually learn the pieces that make it up.

Document, for yourself, the things you did so that you can be confident you actually learned something that you can reproduce.

rukshn
Yah but the customizing is minimal in Linux mint, you can't pick a new Desktop environment, you can't modify the look and styles in linux mint, so it's more like using windows IMO, that's why I thought of using something with more freedom
larzang
Of course you can. You can install any DE you want on top of Mint, it's still Linux, and you can modify the appearance of the shipped XFCE or Cinammon DEs with themes.
vezzy-fnord
This is the case for most distributions, indeed. In fact, there's few core/scratch distros and a majority are all derivatives, frequently of other derivatives.

However, there are exceptions. There are experimental (though actually most are very much usable for real-world or even everyday tasks) distros with markedly different and more unconventional software stacks. Examples include Alpine, Morpheus, Sabotage, Void and NixOS. One should not be discouraged from trying those, not least of which is precisely to see other ways of integrating systems beyond the status quo.

not-much-io
I second this. I used to distro jump a lot before I realized that not a whole lot is actually changing from distro to distro. I was basically chasing the default setup of a distro, which has no real point.

I wouldn't go as far as to say, don't care at all. Maybe just avoid overthinking. :)

Main differences of distros to keep in mind:

1) The default setup. (Desktop environment, already installed software, etc.) 2) Available packages. What software and versions of software are available to you without much hassle. 3) System upgradeability. (Rolling - always up to date, or a 6 month release schedule or something in between)

If I were to suggest something, It would be a variant of Arch called Antergos. You get an Arch linux that:

1) Is as easy to install as Ubuntu/Mint etc. 2) Good default setup selection. (Multiple desktop environments and more arguably the benefit of little bloatware) 3) It IS arch, just a extra enabled repository. (Antergoses own). This means you get the AUR (Arch user repository) that gives you easy access to packages that other distros might not have, although they are less reliable. (Though I have yet to see any problems in 2 years) AND the latest versions of much software. (Again can be bad, but in my experience I've only encountered minor annoyances that get fixed quite fast). BUT WAIT, there is more! It's rolling release. Always up to date. :)

In my experience the stability concerns of arch are a myth. If they do occur, it's not like you see crashing of your computer or massive graphical anomalies. Sleep might not trigger properly for a day or two or something like that. And rarely. But this is just my experience. :)

Antergos = Newest SW, rolling release, easy install, good default setup selection, AUR, the fantastic Arch wiki and probably more.

suprjami
This. For me also, a distro is measured by how easily I can get my preferred desktop environment and regularly-used apps.

I am at the level where I can self-solve all my own problems, but if you are a beginner then stick with one of the major distros. Ubuntu and Ubuntu-based distros like Mint can't be beat for the sheer size of their community. Any problem you have, someone else has hit it before, they probably solved it too.

Arch Linux is a great learning experience, you really learn what the components of your system do, how they work, and how they interact together. Everyone should use Arch for a while as they become intermediate Linux users. Eventually maintaining your Arch system becomes a chore which eats into your "computer stuff" time.

Once you're at this level, you know what software you want, and you know how most of it works under the hood. Distros are now just different boot screens with different things pre-packaged and different things available in their repos. Use whichever distro provides what you need and gives you the least drama.