Top 10 Distros Linux Fixed
Eloy Mertz
I mean, I want to have both, say, Fedora and Arch, and I want to find my files at home no matter which linux distro I boot into. But if I mount the same partition for /home then I may mess up the configurations saved inside /home directory.
I'd recommend using symlinks for all the common configuration files you find yourself missing from one to the other. Create a new directory in a place accessible to both distros, move the files and symlink from there.
In general, however, I'm interested in a reverse lookup: given kernel version X I'd like to find which distros are still using X or older versions. Is there any easy way to do this, at least for the most popular distributions?
You can gather this information using their advanced search page, which has a cool feature that allows you to search for distribution releases that include a specific version of a package. In this case, you're interested in the linux package.
None of these newfangled solutions addresses the needs of any of the distros,despite our repeated pleas. They all break backwards compatibility with ouruse-case and send our complaints to /dev/null. I have seen representatives fromevery Linux distro making repeated, desperate pleas to Python to address theirconcerns, from Debian to Arch to Alpine to NixOS, plus non-Linux distros likeFreeBSD and Illumos. Everyone is frustrated. We are all struggling to deal withPython right now, and Python is not listening to us.
So I want to switch distros(from one Debian to another Debian). Thing is I have a lot of stuff installed on my old distro. How can I easily transfer/reinstall all these software on to the new distro?
Most distros are really pointless. That's what I think. Take elementary os, it is the pantheon desktop that matters, not the base distro, u can take debian or arch or even fedora and install that de and you can get the exact same setup and experience. Same goes for lubuntu, just install lxqt, xubuntu, just install xfce, kubuntu, just install kde, Garuda , just use arch and try to rice it. Just making a whole distro out of it is absolutely pointless. Really. Now, people would say that "it's hard for beginners to understand what a de and distro is and it is hard for them to install things like that as they come from windows world". I agree, but beginners should move away from using Linux this way and move to a better way of using the os. Linux should never try to replace windows, it should be it's own way, why replicate something bad (windows) when you can be so awesome? (Linux). We should just have some base distros that have a tui installer like debian or manual installer like arch (arch now has archinstall too, which makes it so fking easy to install). Then people can Install whatever they want on that minimal base. Creating a new distro for every de created more confusion, not less confusion for a new user. Linux beginners tend to think that all Linux Distros are very different when Infact they're pretty much all the same. Arch is distro done "right". Sorry guys, I'm not trying to be a cringe elitist, but archlinux just gives u a minimal base and u can install whatever u like, same goes for debian. (For ubuntu and fedora you need to jump through some hoops and install server edition and then install them.) In arch, You will have up-to-date packages so you will have recent version of every dependency or library in your system, which doesn't give dependency hell like situations. It's rolling release and it's so good. Ofcourse arch tends to move very fast , which might make it more unstable (fast=unstable) for some people. They can use the grand daddy debian. And there are rhel distros for business users etc.
"There aren't really that many usable desktop oriented Linux distributions. There are really few countable with fingers no.of distros that every other distro is based on. Almost all of the derivatived are based either on debian (ubuntu), arch or fedora. This creates a psuedo confusion for new users. We need to ignore all the pointless distros and focus on parent distros. Desktops or ricing not equals distros. And yes, beginners should know how to use Linux on command line if they want to use Linux, cuz that's the better way of using an OS (type your angry comments below)"
Edit 2: contrary to the above post, I still see the need for some grandpa certified newbie distros. But I really think they need to be based on debian or ubuntu as they're the giants and because these distros are meant to be setup and forget kind, it makes no sense to use distros like arch (as u can break ur system if u don't read news (ex: community repo removal or grub) and pkgbuilds for aur. Same goes for fedora more or less. Any other distro doesn't matter. Nevertheless, these grandpa distros need to be kept limited and should be given default options for best compatibility.
Edit 3: Maybe the title should be "most distros are pointless (for advanced/power users) as advanced users are willing to learn and invest time as I can't speak for every noob distro and how it changed everyone's life by adding that one more app to the parent distro and called it a "new distro"
Edit 4: Many people here are mistaking freedom. They're saying freedom means "having more distros" but instead it is "having more control in your distro". I'm not stopping anyone from making new distros. it just doesn't make sense, I'm stating the obvious
Is it true that different distros all keep the kernel unchanged(of course they will update the kernel when there is a new version from the above site), and only make changes to the various utilities of their own?
All distros use the same "Linux" kernel, however all distros make slight changes to it in order make the kernel work best for them, however these changes will almost always get uploaded back to the top where Linus will merge them himself. So all use the Linux kernel, however they all have a few different lines of code in them to make them work best for that distro. It is also worth noting that distros will ship with the version of the kernel that they see fit for each version. Some distros choose a newer kernel then others. The main pro of a new kernel are improvements in driver's and hardware compatibility. The con is a loss in stability as all new code has bugs in it. So you trade features for stability. This is why distros known for being more stable will usually always ship an older kernel than the more risky distros. To find what kernel you are running enter:
Ubuntu is based on latest stable linux version released, more correctly, it is based on the kernel of debian (more correctly, from debian unstable release, except the LTS's which are derived from Debian testing) and then add some more distro specific customization.
While you could obtain and assemble all of these programs yourself, it's time-consuming and hard to get everything set up. That's where distros come in. They do all the hard work, deciding which open-source software to use and presenting it in a format that's ready for you to use with minimal configuration.
Beyond that, the world is your oyster. You'll find distros for home entertainment servers, software development, security and privacy, and many other specific tasks. Decide what you want to achieve with Linux, and use that as a basis for your distro research.
The best Linux distros offer stability and security in a Linux environment, but there are many different types and flavors according to different needs. Here we'll help you find the one you for you, regardless as to whether you're a beginner or advanced user.
Many of the most popular Linux distros are designed to appeal to a wide user base and can be tailored as per individual requirements, but there are a whole lot of specialized distros that are built for a particular purpose.
While there are several other gaming distros for Linux, what makes Pop!_OS unique is that it ships with all the necessary plumbing for gamers. For instance, its developers ensure that hybrid graphics work flawlessly on the platform.
We recommend that you use a free GNU/Linux system distribution, one that does not include proprietary software at all. That way you can be sure that you arenot installing any nonfree programs. Here is our list of such distros:
Free GNU/Linux distributions.
All of these existing distros could use more development help. Thus,if you want to make an effective contribution to free GNU/Linuxdistributions, we suggest that you join the development of an existingfree distro rather that starting a new free distro.
These system distributions are free but quite different from GNU.Using them is not similar to using GNU/Linux. However, they satisfythe same ethical criteria that we apply to GNU/Linux distros.
Free Non-GNU distributions.
All of these existing distros could use more development help. Thus,if you want to make an effective contribution in this area, we suggestthat you join the development of an existing free distro rather thatstarting a new free distro.
It used to be hard to install programs on Linux, but that's no longer the case. Under the hood, things can still be complex, but now almost all distros have application stores. These make installing new programs as simple as pick and click.
It used to be hard to install programs on Linux, but that's no longer the case. Under the hood, things can still be complex, but now almost all distros have application stores. These make installing new programs, such as PikaOS as simple as pick and click.
If Linux distros aren't packaging Rust quickly enough, can the Rust project work around it? For example, provide official up-to-date packages for mainstream Linux distros, or convince Linux distros to package only rustup, and not rustc and cargo.
Linux distros range from "LTS" types that freeze Rust versions so old that they're unusable with a majority of crates-io crates, to more frequently updating and "rolling" distros that try to keep up with Rust, within constraints of their own release schedule. Is a distro with a 6-month-old Rust acceptable, or are they shipping versions past their expiration date?
dd2b598166