[-] yala@discuss.online 12 points 3 months ago

Small nitpick; layering is technically only a thing on Fedora Atomic. Not all immutable distros subscribe to it.

[-] yala@discuss.online 7 points 3 months ago

From the FAQ of Qubes OS (i.e. most secure desktop OS for general use):

"Why does Qubes use Xen instead of KVM or some other hypervisor?"

"In short: we believe the Xen architecture allows for the creation of more secure systems (i.e. with a much smaller TCB, which translates to a smaller attack surface). We discuss this in much greater depth in our Architecture Specification document."

[-] yala@discuss.online 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Ubuntu is no longer the user friendly everyman’s desktop system anymore.

Agreed.

Arch is extremely user friendly, just not the installation process.

I do wonder what your definition of user friendly is. Cuz I can't fathom how you can think that a distro that subscribes to what's quoted below can (by any stretch of the imagination) be considered user friendly.

"Note: It is imperative to keep up to date with changes in Arch Linux that require manual intervention before upgrading your system. Subscribe to the arch-announce mailing list or the recent news RSS feed. Alternatively, check the front page Arch news every time before you update."

Which simple means that you have to check if you can update before you actually perform an update. That's just wild.

And you know what's most curious about this, we've actually solved (within Linux) issues related to updating your system. You read that correct, it's a solved problem. And I hope that you'll benefit from these advancements even if you continue to use Arch.

Btw, please don't come to me with packages that automatically pop up in terminal to inform you about manual intervention. On my system, updates occur automatically in the background and with some black magic shenanigans (or just great engineering) it 'fixes' itself without requiring any manual intervention from me. That pop-up message in terminal can't compete with that.

I find it to be much less of a pain in the ass to use than Debian based systems.

That's subjective, but sure; you're absolutely free to think that.

For one, you have the Arch User Repository, so you’re very unlikely to need to not be able to find some software you want, and more importantly, so many packages in Debian are out of date and they take forever to update them, stuff often breaks because the version needed as a dependency for something else is not in the repositories.

Distrobox exists. Moving on.

and pacman is so much more robust than apt.

What do you mean with robust here? And what makes you think that pacman is much more robust than apt? Thank you in advance for clarifying/elaborating!

I get frustrated online when I see people saying “Ubuntu is the most user friendly distro” or “arch is not for noobs”, this stuff was true like 10 years ago, that’s no longer the case. Ubuntu is user hostile, and there are arch derivatives that are basically arch with a graphical installer, which is the only part of using arch that is hard for people who aren’t hardcore nerds.

Honestly, I actually agree with you. Ubuntu has indeed lost all of its credibility. And Arch is absolutely not as bad as people make it out to be. But! In an environment in which Linux Mint, Zorin OS, Pop!_OS, Bazzite are mentioned; Arch simply is (by contrast) the lesser option in terms easy of use etc. So, while in absolute terms, it's definitely not as bad as peeps make it out to be. It is, compared to the earlier mentioned distros, simply less newbie friendly.

It’s not like Gentoo or Void or Alpine or Nix or running a BSD system or something advanced like that.

Thankfully, no one ever bothers to recommend these to new users 😉.

So, to be clear, these are clearly too advanced and thankfully people never recommend these to newer users. However, while Arch isn't that bad and thus can be used by some newbie users, it should IMO only very very carefully be recommended to new users. If it's the kind of person that likes to learn as they go and enjoys reading documentation, then (by all means) it's absolutely fine to recommend it. But you won't find them that frequently...

[-] yala@discuss.online 7 points 3 months ago

So I have a two monitor setup, and I really dislike how gnome only lets you have the bar on the primary screen unless you install a plugin that is very outdated and I cannot get working on the latest version of gnome or use dash to dock, and I am not a fan of the dock style…

I believe both Dash to Panel and V-Shell are capable of resolving this issue in a way that should suit your needs IF you wish to continue using GNOME.

[-] yala@discuss.online 10 points 4 months ago

Why does your brother use NixOS in the first place?

Don't get me wrong; I think NixOS is a very interesting project with a very bright future. It probably wouldn't be an exaggeration if I said that NixOS has single-handedly inspired the current immutable revolution. However, it's also a distro that wants you to learn and digest its ways before it will return the favor.

But, based on my reading/understanding of your comment, your brother doesn't strike me as a seasoned Linux user. Am I right? Btw, NixOS is hard unbeknownst of how many experiences you got with other distros. However, I would simply never recommend a new user to use (Gentoo, Guix System or) NixOS. There are definitely outliers, but they would have to find it themselves then.

[-] yala@discuss.online 8 points 4 months ago

Thank you for some much needed background information (and perhaps even some of Ubuntu's justification)!

There is literally not a single useful comment here.

That's a bit harsh 😜. Though, I agree the 'f*ck-Ubuntu'-circlejerk is very present.

It is an optional service, they warn you that you use outdated packages, and offer a solution.

I guess it's wishful thinking to argue that they should have included the security patches from the get-go.

[-] yala@discuss.online 6 points 4 months ago

Btw, OP, I foresee a switch to Linux Mint Xfce Edition. Please consider writing about your experiences in which you compare Xubuntu to Linux Mint Xfce Edition. Thanks in advance!

[-] yala@discuss.online 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Unfortunately, I can't take this seriously as 1% lows and additional variance due to difference in DE haven't been accounted for.

Furthermore, you bet that Tuxedo OS has done a splendid job at optimizing performance on a device that's sold by Tuxedo. Therefore, I wonder if it's even a fair comparison to begin with.

[-] yala@discuss.online 14 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

For me:

  • atomic updates
  • reproducibility
  • (to some degree) declarative system configuration
  • increased security
  • built-in rollback functionality

and their consequences;

  • rock solid system even with relatively up to date packages
  • possibility to enable automatic updates in background without fearing breakage
  • (quasi) factory reset feature
  • setting up a new system in just a fraction of the time required otherwise

are the primary reasons why I absolutely adore atomic/immutable distros.

Furthermore, it minimizes all kinds of issues related to or caused by bit rot, configuration drift and hidden/unknown states. (Note that you won't reap all of these benefits on all atomic/immutable distros.)

[-] yala@discuss.online 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Fam, with al due respect, make up your mind; because, unfortunately, it's not possible to keep up great security practices in conjunction with access to the AUR on a low powered system.

I'd argue that your best bet is probs Kicksecure. Though, I reckon you'll have a hard time on a VM regardless.

[-] yala@discuss.online 9 points 4 months ago

I’ve been bouncing between live versions of ubuntu and mint

Ah okay, is this problem on Ubuntu or on Mint (or are you going to tackle it on both 😜)?

I’m still learning, so thank you for educating a linux ignoramus like myself.

It has been my pleasure fam!

[-] yala@discuss.online 8 points 4 months ago

I've been on Fedora Silverblue for over two years now and I've never experienced such a thing. Would you mind elaborating? Like, does the system force itself off after the first reboot without any input? Or, instead, do you notice that the installed package is not installed and therefore succumb to another reboot by your own admission? Which, to be honest, seems like some broken interaction*.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

yala

joined 4 months ago