Ask HN: What is your favorite Linux distro and why?
19 comments
I tried Fedora a few months back, (as I wanted a specific kernel), but I found it required a lot more tweaking and configuring than Ubunutu or Mint or Manjaro. It felt like Linux was 7 or 8 years ago.
collyw, if someone is new to Linux I would also suggest them to use Ubuntu or Mint. But, as you start using it at some point of time you may want to tweak your system like you wanted(given that you've bandwidth and motivation to do so). It's about that time, most novice to advance sysadmins/users would want to use something like Fedora or Arch.
What breed of fedora? Or is that a stupid questions, because if you're using fedora you're using the cutting edge...?
Manjaro.
A user friendly version of Arch. It includes a graphic package manager - which seems to be discouraged by the main Arch distro looking at their wiki (they want you to learn and understand pacman). The fact is sometimes I want a graphical package manager to make searching easier and I don't know the exact name of the package I am looking for. Other times when I do know the details it is easier to use the command line. Having the choice is good.
A user friendly version of Arch. It includes a graphic package manager - which seems to be discouraged by the main Arch distro looking at their wiki (they want you to learn and understand pacman). The fact is sometimes I want a graphical package manager to make searching easier and I don't know the exact name of the package I am looking for. Other times when I do know the details it is easier to use the command line. Having the choice is good.
Ubuntu. Hands down.
None of them are perfect, but my experience with Ubuntu is that it is hands down, the most desktop-friendly distro out there.
On the other hand, the "RPM hell" that is rumored to be gone in RPM-based distros, is still alive and well. I had a STABLE server-based distro warn me that packages were broken, and there were unresolvable dependencies. This was with a very vanilla install, and no extra repos. Needless to say, it scared me away from RPM-based distros for the foreseeable future.
Is Ubuntu problem-free? Certainly not. However, when I have encountered the occasional issue, there have been workarounds.
The other thing is... if someone is making a Linux version of their app, everyone and their uncle is providing .deb packages. There's a LOT of momentum behind it. So... if I'm going to go off the beaten path of OS X and (heaven forbid) Windows... Ubuntu is the most painless.
Another reason I like Ubuntu so much is its polish. It looks more polished than any distro I've used, to date.
I hear they may do some patching with their fonts, and some other magic under the hood.
I like Arch Linux, as well. If I could get Ubuntu's polish on Arch, it would be a perfect world. :)
None of them are perfect, but my experience with Ubuntu is that it is hands down, the most desktop-friendly distro out there.
On the other hand, the "RPM hell" that is rumored to be gone in RPM-based distros, is still alive and well. I had a STABLE server-based distro warn me that packages were broken, and there were unresolvable dependencies. This was with a very vanilla install, and no extra repos. Needless to say, it scared me away from RPM-based distros for the foreseeable future.
Is Ubuntu problem-free? Certainly not. However, when I have encountered the occasional issue, there have been workarounds.
The other thing is... if someone is making a Linux version of their app, everyone and their uncle is providing .deb packages. There's a LOT of momentum behind it. So... if I'm going to go off the beaten path of OS X and (heaven forbid) Windows... Ubuntu is the most painless.
Another reason I like Ubuntu so much is its polish. It looks more polished than any distro I've used, to date.
I hear they may do some patching with their fonts, and some other magic under the hood.
I like Arch Linux, as well. If I could get Ubuntu's polish on Arch, it would be a perfect world. :)
Not that it's particularly rational, but I like Wary Puppy 5.5 because I am running it on my Toshiba Satellite 1805-S203 with 384kb of RAM.
I bought it the month before 911. In 2004 it was stolen and pawned and I had to take the pawn broker to court to get it back. When we were still on 802.11b my son used it with Windows 2k (rather than its original ME) and a PCMCIA wireless card. In 2009, I replaced the voltage regulator for the screen with one from eBay. Then it sat dormant for a few years after the Wireless network was upgraded.
A couple of years ago, I tried installing Linux and paid the dumbtax when I reformatted the hard disk. Then recently I pulled it apart, stuck in the BroadCom daughter card and 40gig hard disk salvaged from another laptop and after more work than I care to admit got it up and running and productive again.
I've got Emacs and MITscheme for fun. Node runs too. There's SSH to the big box [CentOS 6.5] for anything else. What more could I want?
Well ok, a couple of 256meg SODIMS and a PCMCIA ethernet card would be nice.
I bought it the month before 911. In 2004 it was stolen and pawned and I had to take the pawn broker to court to get it back. When we were still on 802.11b my son used it with Windows 2k (rather than its original ME) and a PCMCIA wireless card. In 2009, I replaced the voltage regulator for the screen with one from eBay. Then it sat dormant for a few years after the Wireless network was upgraded.
A couple of years ago, I tried installing Linux and paid the dumbtax when I reformatted the hard disk. Then recently I pulled it apart, stuck in the BroadCom daughter card and 40gig hard disk salvaged from another laptop and after more work than I care to admit got it up and running and productive again.
I've got Emacs and MITscheme for fun. Node runs too. There's SSH to the big box [CentOS 6.5] for anything else. What more could I want?
Well ok, a couple of 256meg SODIMS and a PCMCIA ethernet card would be nice.
Kubuntu -- Just works for me and I much prefer the KDE desktop. Have it set up on 3 completely different machines and it works great on all of them. I highly recommend everybody who uses Ubuntu and is looking for something different to at least try it out.
Laptop: Linux Mint 16. LM 8-12 were absolutely fantastic, everything worked (suspend, audio, video, mail, etc), and life was good. Went from 12 to 15, and things were a bit rockier. Suspend lost the X setting on waking, mail (evolution) borks a lot. Desperate for a better life, went to 16. Not great, but better. I use hibernate rather than suspend now, and evolution only occasionally fails (it's a keyring thing).
Netbook: Ubuntu LTS (12.10 I think). Thunderbird. Everything works (except, oddly, google chrome doesn't play video worth a crap- may be the old specs).
Servers: Debian Squeeze. Solid server distro.
Netbook: Ubuntu LTS (12.10 I think). Thunderbird. Everything works (except, oddly, google chrome doesn't play video worth a crap- may be the old specs).
Servers: Debian Squeeze. Solid server distro.
Fedora for my desktop. It's cutting edge and has sane package naming. I've also been using RPM based distros since the origin RedHat 4.
CentOS on servers. Rock solid, long support.
I had an Ubuntu phase when it was first released. Even helped 2 companies standardize on it while moving developers off windows machines to Linux. But ditched it for personal use when Fedora 7 came out.
The only other distro that interests me is Arch. It's definitely the tweakers distro, and if I were younger and had more time to tinker with Linux I'd run it on my desktop.
I guess the main reason why is familiarity - 17 years with RPM based distros.
CentOS on servers. Rock solid, long support.
I had an Ubuntu phase when it was first released. Even helped 2 companies standardize on it while moving developers off windows machines to Linux. But ditched it for personal use when Fedora 7 came out.
The only other distro that interests me is Arch. It's definitely the tweakers distro, and if I were younger and had more time to tinker with Linux I'd run it on my desktop.
I guess the main reason why is familiarity - 17 years with RPM based distros.
Ubuntu - Great package manager, best community support, and good flexibility. Don't like stock Ubuntu but with a few installs I can easily fix the desktop environment and other things I think are deficient.
Bedrock Linux, as it gives me many of the advantages of other distros at the same time. Stability of Debian/CentOS, access to cutting-edge packages from Arch (including AUR), ability to have portage automatically compile things with my preferences from Gentoo, library compatibility with Ubuntu for things like steam, etc etc.
Note: Main area it is lacking is the "just works without setup"; it does not compete with Ubuntu/Mint/etc on that front.
Full disclosure: I'm the founder and lead developer.
Note: Main area it is lacking is the "just works without setup"; it does not compete with Ubuntu/Mint/etc on that front.
Full disclosure: I'm the founder and lead developer.
I just want linux that works without setup, so I use Ubuntu.
Arch - amazing documentation and user community. Enjoyable learning experience.
Linux from Scratch - I am a masochist
Linux from Scratch - I am a masochist
I like them all. A few years ago I would get irked by some things redhat did v debian derivatives and vice versa but now not so much.
I am just super glad after all these years we are all able to download and use (for free mostly) such an excellent OS.
I am just super glad after all these years we are all able to download and use (for free mostly) such an excellent OS.
Debian: rock solid stability
+points - couldnt agree more, yours is not an understatement by any means, it might not always be on the cutting edge but its not that far behind, and if you want systems that work and work well debian has never let me down (5+ years and going now).
Ubuntu - ( just works ).
but I am exploring Arch these days and looks like I will like it more if I can stick to it for more time ..
Servers - Debian ( Stable, Secure, Well documented with good tutorials )
Servers - Debian ( Stable, Secure, Well documented with good tutorials )
Linux Mint. Simple, intutive and plays everything.
Arch - all the cool new toys.
I use Arch, Debian, and OpenBSD (which I do know is not a version of Unix).
elementaryos: simpler, light and nice look & feel
Quite true, I just wish that we could get updated libraries (i.e. arch under the hood)
Maybe this will happen if it's going to be based off of 14.04.
Maybe this will happen if it's going to be based off of 14.04.
Ubuntu: best booting sound and packet manager
Debian Linux for server (stable, tested).
Rant: Few years ago the state of yum based distros was very bad and at that time Ubuntu came and was instantly favoured. Right now rpm based distros are in much better shape and deserves a shot. About pkg-management -- I find apt clumsy for example you need to apt-cache search/list, but to install do apt-get install; I like yum (search/install etc. just one tool) and rpm a lot.