>GNOME 44
i, too, enjoy nautilus being broken, desktop elements being redrawn and moved around, extensions breaking every few months. hate old versions that just work
I installed linux on my home pc for the first time yesterday. I tried opensuse and mint. I didnt like either. Whats good for me? Yes i need something that just werks and is as comfy as windows ltsc
>Yes i need something that just werks and is as comfy as windows ltsc
If Mint didn't scratch that itch idk if anything will, but it might be worth giving Zorin a shot
>Yes i need something that just werks and is as comfy as windows ltsc
what exactly do you mean when you say this? at the end of the day those are two different operating systems and certain things will be done differently. most linux distros are like LTSC in the sense they do as told and dont harrass the user. if you want a decade's worth of support per release, Debian, Ubuntu LTS and RHEL all do that.
Need something that requires zero effort to use. I do not care enough to learn all the intricacies of linux.
>Using linux and learning it are different.
what do you mean? im talking about learning to use it, which you will have to do to some degree, no matter how winfag friendly the distro might be (which is what Mint is and you already said you didn't like it). software management is different. you will inevitably run into issues like being unable to copy shit onto a USB drive. if you're expecting "zero effort" and are unwilling to learn, then don't waste your time and stick to LTSC.
>Yes i need something that just werks and is as comfy as windows ltsc
what exactly do you mean when you say this? at the end of the day those are two different operating systems and certain things will be done differently. most linux distros are like LTSC in the sense they do as told and dont harrass the user. if you want a decade's worth of support per release, Debian, Ubuntu LTS and RHEL all do that.
I went with Ubuntu 3 years ago. Yoou seem like more of a Mint person. Here's a tip I didn't listen too for a long time but when I did it made the GNU/Linux experience much better. "Linux isn't Windows even though it might look a lot like it. It's going to behave differently. Just use it for a while and learn how it works."
Mint didn't work for me because it reminded me of Windows and I had expectations that it should act like Windows so when I didn't I became frustrated. Ubuntu (Gnome) forced me to give up that expectation and I learned pretty quickly how to be productive with it.
I've been very satisfied with Linux and have zero plans to go back to windows (for me and my current hardware, the only downside has been very basic printing options. My printer had more features with Windows).
>why?
Because it's a huge buggy blob that runs on PID 1 and goes against the whole point of Linux? Might as well use Windows if I have to restart my computer after updates.
If the premise is that you are not supposed to read anything, then you wouldn't be able to install any OS. Which field is my password? Which field is my username?
The installer tells you it will set your user as administrator if you leave root password empty. RTFM
>bending the knee to GNU since the '90s >always calling it GNU/Linux >always keeping the nonfree stuff on an unofficial separate repo >having long explanations about free software on Debian website >having direct links to GNU site >still never being accepted as a GNU approved freedom distro
Why would they keep doing it if it's only acting as an inconvenience to their users and gets no recognition or approval from GNU anyway? People who install Debian want their wifi to work. That's all that's happening anyway. You're not getting Microsoft Edge as your default browser suddenly.
Don't think they ever cared about being approved by Stallfat, they have a slightly less restrictive philosophy regarding free software and that's fine. They let you get non-free shit if you want, they just make it clear that it's non-free. I don't see the issue with this approach. If they specifically wanted to do it to boot-lick Smellman, they'd have it done like he wanted years ago. They insist on their approach because they think it's right, not to appease anyone.
I like that they call it GNU/Linux personally, it makes things more clear.
I read Debian's Installation Guide and had a successful installation first try, yes WiFi too.
I'm not a coder or a hacker and I need GUIs because my terminal command knowledge is limited. I was 3 years on Ubuntu before I installed Debian. I'm enjoying Debian stable. It took a few days accept the whole stable repo deal, I didn't realize what I had done to my Ubuntu install going to so many different repos and PPAs. It's just a learning experience and I've learned a lot.
If you got wifi to work you most likely enabled the nonfree repository since 99% of the time the wifi requires nonfree drivers. Or you went to the unofficial image listing that has the nonfree drivers included. This is what I usually do. Debian 12 doesn't require you to enable it manually anymore which means the installation might actually find your wifi drivers and install them. The difference in my case is just that the download link doesn't say "unofficial" anymore but for some users it might be important since they don't know what the deal is. They click "Download" from the front page, get the first image they see and wonder why the wifi doesn't work.
That seems fine. Debian's not Ubuntu. It's not for people that don't like reading or are not technically inclined. Being the sort of person that reads beyond a "download" button seems like a good indication of its type of users
>Debian's not Ubuntu
It almost is since the defaults are very reasonable. If you plug the computer to a TV it shows the picture. If you have a network printer it finds it right away. If you have a separate file for Bash aliases the bashrc file already has defined it and will search for it. It's not like Arch where you don't get anything by default and have to configure every little thing first. After trying all kinds of new distros Debian always feels like coming back to home. Everything works as you would expect it to.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I really like both Debian and Arch. Both make me really excited when I read something in their docs (you know the feel, there's so much to learn and it's well written), and both feel good to use in their own way.
Recently I had to remind myself of the way Debian distributes kernel updates - for example, they introduce their own versioning within e.g. 5.10.x which doesn't match upstream, but it's for the purpose of staying binary compatible with e.g. already built DKMS modules. That's pretty considerate, just a bit confusing at first. But makes sense for Debian, and u n a m e -a will show the upstream version as well.
I really can't wait to try 12 on my home server again, and migrate my other server from 11. Turns out I haven't done a major version distro upgrade so far, hopefully it's smooth and won't make me miss Arch there.
Speaking of Debian, where can I see the list of package versions that are in Debian 12?
There will be a list of versions in the announcement post (kinda interesting because that shows what packages they focus on), but you can look at https://packages.debian.org/testing/allpackages or go into specific package and from there search for others in bookworm (current testing afaik).
One thing that imo is less straightforward on Arch is the online packages list. Always takes me a moment to orient myself around it, meanwhile Arch and Alpine package site are way easier to navigate (especially quicker than finding the one search box where you can list all branches of Debian).
wow LULZ really throw a "connection error" for mentioning the command used to check kernel version?
Also testing would be a terrible idea for servers. Why would you want a semi-rolling release for a server. You want stability and security patches, not new features breaking old shit.
I read some homosexual the other day claim that KDE was broken there or something and better in other distros. What distros, specifically, and what's broken?
same, but Red Hat. updooters will never know this feel.
Imagine making an account to download Linux
Doesn't have GNOME 44. I'll stick to fedora.
>GNOME 44
i, too, enjoy nautilus being broken, desktop elements being redrawn and moved around, extensions breaking every few months. hate old versions that just work
>systemdick
Ew
No, you don't understand, I need the absolute latest, most unstable editions of all my software packages because.......I just do, ok?????
I installed linux on my home pc for the first time yesterday. I tried opensuse and mint. I didnt like either. Whats good for me? Yes i need something that just werks and is as comfy as windows ltsc
>Yes i need something that just werks and is as comfy as windows ltsc
If Mint didn't scratch that itch idk if anything will, but it might be worth giving Zorin a shot
Ill try zorin
Need something that requires zero effort to use. I do not care enough to learn all the intricacies of linux.
>I do not care enough to learn all the intricacies of linux
then why bother using it at all? stick to LTSC
Using linux and learning it are different. Perhaps as i adjust i will come to learn it in depth
>Using linux and learning it are different.
what do you mean? im talking about learning to use it, which you will have to do to some degree, no matter how winfag friendly the distro might be (which is what Mint is and you already said you didn't like it). software management is different. you will inevitably run into issues like being unable to copy shit onto a USB drive. if you're expecting "zero effort" and are unwilling to learn, then don't waste your time and stick to LTSC.
>Yes i need something that just werks and is as comfy as windows ltsc
what exactly do you mean when you say this? at the end of the day those are two different operating systems and certain things will be done differently. most linux distros are like LTSC in the sense they do as told and dont harrass the user. if you want a decade's worth of support per release, Debian, Ubuntu LTS and RHEL all do that.
I went with Ubuntu 3 years ago. Yoou seem like more of a Mint person. Here's a tip I didn't listen too for a long time but when I did it made the GNU/Linux experience much better. "Linux isn't Windows even though it might look a lot like it. It's going to behave differently. Just use it for a while and learn how it works."
Mint didn't work for me because it reminded me of Windows and I had expectations that it should act like Windows so when I didn't I became frustrated. Ubuntu (Gnome) forced me to give up that expectation and I learned pretty quickly how to be productive with it.
I've been very satisfied with Linux and have zero plans to go back to windows (for me and my current hardware, the only downside has been very basic printing options. My printer had more features with Windows).
No it doesn't. Something as basic as the fucking wifi didn't work.
Works on my machine
Not in newer machines. debian/mint is Too outdated. I can't believe people recommend it to new people who don't understand compatibility issues
you meant devuan
>SYSTEMD IS BAD
>why?
>IT JUST IS OK!?
>why?
Because it's a huge buggy blob that runs on PID 1 and goes against the whole point of Linux? Might as well use Windows if I have to restart my computer after updates.
>have to restart my computer after updates
wergz on mai mujiin
delusional
Until it doesn't
PEBKAC
Might install it on my laptop I only use once in a while when bookworm comes out.
Also use it on servers.
But for desktop I prefer Arch.
except for sudo out of the box
use ubuntu
Another retard that can't read, lmao.
It literally tells you everything in the installer.
>install OS
>it doesn't work out of the box
NGMI
If the premise is that you are not supposed to read anything, then you wouldn't be able to install any OS. Which field is my password? Which field is my username?
The installer tells you it will set your user as administrator if you leave root password empty. RTFM
Yes it does.
No more "A stop job is running"
Install the real just werks OS
This
My brothers.
>12 is nonfree
>no notification to users
>no opt-in
What will be the new free distro that everyone forks instead?
Gentoo with ACCEPT_LICENSE="-* @FREE"
>bending the knee to GNU since the '90s
>always calling it GNU/Linux
>always keeping the nonfree stuff on an unofficial separate repo
>having long explanations about free software on Debian website
>having direct links to GNU site
>still never being accepted as a GNU approved freedom distro
Why would they keep doing it if it's only acting as an inconvenience to their users and gets no recognition or approval from GNU anyway? People who install Debian want their wifi to work. That's all that's happening anyway. You're not getting Microsoft Edge as your default browser suddenly.
Don't think they ever cared about being approved by Stallfat, they have a slightly less restrictive philosophy regarding free software and that's fine. They let you get non-free shit if you want, they just make it clear that it's non-free. I don't see the issue with this approach. If they specifically wanted to do it to boot-lick Smellman, they'd have it done like he wanted years ago. They insist on their approach because they think it's right, not to appease anyone.
I like that they call it GNU/Linux personally, it makes things more clear.
I read Debian's Installation Guide and had a successful installation first try, yes WiFi too.
I'm not a coder or a hacker and I need GUIs because my terminal command knowledge is limited. I was 3 years on Ubuntu before I installed Debian. I'm enjoying Debian stable. It took a few days accept the whole stable repo deal, I didn't realize what I had done to my Ubuntu install going to so many different repos and PPAs. It's just a learning experience and I've learned a lot.
If you got wifi to work you most likely enabled the nonfree repository since 99% of the time the wifi requires nonfree drivers. Or you went to the unofficial image listing that has the nonfree drivers included. This is what I usually do. Debian 12 doesn't require you to enable it manually anymore which means the installation might actually find your wifi drivers and install them. The difference in my case is just that the download link doesn't say "unofficial" anymore but for some users it might be important since they don't know what the deal is. They click "Download" from the front page, get the first image they see and wonder why the wifi doesn't work.
That seems fine. Debian's not Ubuntu. It's not for people that don't like reading or are not technically inclined. Being the sort of person that reads beyond a "download" button seems like a good indication of its type of users
>Debian's not Ubuntu
It almost is since the defaults are very reasonable. If you plug the computer to a TV it shows the picture. If you have a network printer it finds it right away. If you have a separate file for Bash aliases the bashrc file already has defined it and will search for it. It's not like Arch where you don't get anything by default and have to configure every little thing first. After trying all kinds of new distros Debian always feels like coming back to home. Everything works as you would expect it to.
I really like both Debian and Arch. Both make me really excited when I read something in their docs (you know the feel, there's so much to learn and it's well written), and both feel good to use in their own way.
Recently I had to remind myself of the way Debian distributes kernel updates - for example, they introduce their own versioning within e.g. 5.10.x which doesn't match upstream, but it's for the purpose of staying binary compatible with e.g. already built DKMS modules. That's pretty considerate, just a bit confusing at first. But makes sense for Debian, and u n a m e -a will show the upstream version as well.
I really can't wait to try 12 on my home server again, and migrate my other server from 11. Turns out I haven't done a major version distro upgrade so far, hopefully it's smooth and won't make me miss Arch there.
There will be a list of versions in the announcement post (kinda interesting because that shows what packages they focus on), but you can look at https://packages.debian.org/testing/allpackages or go into specific package and from there search for others in bookworm (current testing afaik).
One thing that imo is less straightforward on Arch is the online packages list. Always takes me a moment to orient myself around it, meanwhile Arch and Alpine package site are way easier to navigate (especially quicker than finding the one search box where you can list all branches of Debian).
wow LULZ really throw a "connection error" for mentioning the command used to check kernel version?
apt has dependency issues
Then others have dependency problems and pacman dependency disaster
What does pacman do wrong, quads man?
Not trying to defend Arch or anything, genuinely curious.
Pretty good. Might install to real hardware when it releases
>Stable debian instead of sid on desktop
You're not the brightest out there, greentext man.
Maybe
It doesn't change the fact that stable and testing releases are pointless outside of servers
He IS using the latest currently available. Debian 12 is in a freeze currently. sid has nothing new right now.
Also testing would be a terrible idea for servers. Why would you want a semi-rolling release for a server. You want stability and security patches, not new features breaking old shit.
I read some homosexual the other day claim that KDE was broken there or something and better in other distros. What distros, specifically, and what's broken?
If you're gonna install debian, go for GNOME or Xfce. KDE has always felt like a second-rate citizen
>KDE has always felt like a second-rate citizen
Ok but why. I'm asking for specifics here.
Speaking of Debian, where can I see the list of package versions that are in Debian 12?
It doesn't support my new hardware so it really doesn't get fucked poor fag/shitworlder