this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2024
1735 points (97.8% liked)

linuxmemes

20688 readers
1142 users here now

I use Arch btw

Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
1735
Hot take (lemmy.ml)
submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
358 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FalseDiamond 9 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Disagree on picking RPM distros for an absolute beginner (this is what the image is about at least). SUSE maybe but you don't want a newbie having to deal with US patent bullshit and especially SELinux. Similarly, no newbie will ever pic a barebones WM as a first time user.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago

I have used Fedora for nearly all the time I've daily driven Linux, and haven't encountered any problem that a newbie would encounter and couldn't overcome, excluding distro-agnostic stuff. Yeah, the h264 shit sucks, but if you use flatpaks you shouldn't have to worry about it. And if you ever have to face SELinux, then you're probably doing something that's beyond beginner level.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

It's a very rough guide I threw together. There's all sorts of wedge cases you could use to argue against it. E.g. you could use RPMs on slack Linux. Not exactly user friendly.

Bit on the whole fedora or Suse do the job.

Also desktops are better for newbies. I thought I'd mentioned that but yeah I agree deffo better for newbies while WM managers more for tinkerers/power users.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I dunno, I picked RedHat 5.2 as a complete beginner along with fvwm95 and afterstep, and that worked out okay. Of course, that was 25 years ago.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

25 years ago the viability of options were slightly more prescriptive

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Same. I remember getting interested in Linux in like 1997 or so, and it seemed like RedHat was preferred for newbies.

Of course, what were the alternatives then? It was basically Slackware (or Suse), Debian, and RedHat (or Caldera). There was no RHEL or Canonical or SElinux back then. It was a different time.

Hell one of the language packs for installing RedHat was “Redneck”. It was a gimmick to demonstrate localization options.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 7 months ago

I started on CentOS and don't remember any issues but that was a long time ago. I flirted with Suse, Ubuntu, and Arch when RH started being a super dick. I finally settled on Rocky, rpm is the devil I know.