this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2025
166 points (96.1% liked)

Linux

53575 readers
1350 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Title is quite self-explanatory, reason I wonder is because every now and then I think to myself "maybe distro X is good, maybe I should try it at some point", but then I think a bit more and realise it kind of doesn't make a difference - the only thing I feel kinda matters is rolling vs non-rolling release patterns.

My guiding principles when choosing distro are that I run arch on my desktop because it's what I'm used to (and AUR is nice to have), and Debian on servers because some people said it's good and I the non-rolling release gives me peace of mind that I don't have to update very often. But I could switch both of these out and I really don't think it would make a difference at all.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

I have been using Linux since early March 2020. I chose Debian/Ubuntu-based distributions for two main reasons: stability and my strong familiarity with the APT package manager. The APT man page is deeply ingrained in my memory.

Today I run Debian Stable/Testing and also Unstable, on all my computers 4/4 on Debian!

[–] [email protected] 73 points 1 week ago

Finally time to bust this out again.

[–] [email protected] 52 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Debian for everything since it's one of the few distros that has always been there. It's one of the second distros to come after after SLS. Distros come and go, but Debian marches on.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 week ago

Most big distros are old enough to drink though. Ubuntu is 20yo, Fedora 21yo, openSUSE 18yo, Arch 23yo, Gentoo 23yo. (I got curious and a bit carried away…)

But sure, Debian does have them beat by roughly 10 years (31yo).

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Arch. Purely because of the Arch Wiki. I honestly think it’s the easiest OS to troubleshoot as long as you are willing and able to read every now and again.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago

Agree.

Years ago, I was troubleshooting something (can't remember what) on Ubuntu and realised the package had fixed the bug, but it wasn't in the repos yet.. like months behind.

Looked at Arch with it's up to date repos, moved over and never looked back.

I've reported bugs since, watched the package get updated and seen the improvement on my system... now that's what it should be like.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Bazzite because I get an immutable install that won’t let me accidentally fuck it up. It just works. All necessary drivers for my dock and peripherals are already installed and configured. It’s the very first time in my decades long Linux excursion that I have a user experience that is similar to windows in that sense, but without the enshittifcation of windows.

I genuinely enjoy video editing, gaming, and surfing the web on my laptop when it’s running Bazzite.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago (9 children)

I haven't tried Bazzite yet, but I feel the same about the other ublue flavours.

I'm the most productive I've ever been. Tweaking everything was fun for a few years, but now I just need a distro I can trust, that comes with the tools to do anything.

I see rebases to Bazzite DX are available now. I might give that a go today.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I use NixOS, it appealed to me because i got to a point where i liked minimal distros like arch and void and i could build them up exactly the way i like them to be, however i didn't like how i would have to go through that whole process again if i wanted to do a reinstall. With NixOS i can still craft my OS the way i like it, with the benefit of it being saved as a config, and easy to restore. I did make my own post-install script for void but NixOS is a more solid solution compared to my own janky script. I'm hoping to finally settle down on this distro. I guess the upside to the huge learning curve with nix is that it's a good motivator to not abandon it because it would feel like my efforts to learn it would go to waste lol.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Everything-in-my-life-as-code FTW

Besides everything else you said, I especially love how you can store entire bash scripts in the nix configs, and even populate pieces of said scripts with variables if you so desire.

Also, if you run nixops, it's much easier to work with if your dev system is also running NixOS.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 week ago (11 children)

NixOS. My primary reason for switching was wanting a single list of programs that I had installed. After using ubuntu for 5 years I just lost track of all the tools and versions of software that I had installed...and that didnt even count my laptop. Now all my machines have a single list of applications, and they are all in sync.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago

This is a big reason for me. Also because if anything breaks - even if my system becomes unbootable - I can select the previous generation from the boot menu, and everything is back to working.

It's very empowering, the combination of knowing that I won't irrevocably break things, and that I won't build up cruft from old packages and hand-edited config files. It's given me confidence to tinker more than I did in other distros.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 week ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago

Fedora because it's boring in the best ways. Curious about NixOS though.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago

Debian on my servers as a very stable base, Fedora Kionoite on the laptop to try out the concept of atomic distros.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago

debian is bestian

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Debian Stable.

I've used plenty of distros but Debian continues to give me a stable, predictable OS that allows me to get done what I need to get done with no real surprises. I have used it for many years and know how it works very well at this point.

Its my computing equivalent of a comfy and sturdy pair of well worn boots.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

EndeavourOS because someone said it was Arch for lazy people, and I'm a lazy people.

I did use vanilla Arch before for a while, but just ended up being more work for the same setup with more issues from stuff like missing dependencies I didn't have to worry about with Endeavour.

Only other distro I've used was Pop!_OS when I first tried out Linux.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I switched to Arch Linux for the memes, but now am unable to leave it. I've tried a few dozen distros, but none of them are as good as arch for me, I always come back to it. It's like arch is my perfect distro.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Void linux. Both on wayland + labwc desktop and radpberrypi 4 server with multiple dockers, and a bootable usb for my work laptop. Why? Its lightweight, rolling, rock stable, and easily extendable. I love runit for its simplicity. Love xbps package manager for its speed, and love the good and clear documentation.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago

I’ve been distro hopping for 15+ years but have settled with Mint for the last few, because I just want something that works. I’m too busy nowadays to bother with maintaining a distro, so I just want something that works out of the box and is easy to maintain. The laptop I use it on is connected to the TV as I use it to watch movies.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (7 children)

i been linux only for over 30 years now.

I tend to use Debian stable. At least for the last 15 or so.

The reason is simple. I use it as my main PC and the stability is my main priority.

The only negative is software in the repos is often out of date.

But honestly while that was a pain in the past. Now for the vast majority of things I use. I find flat pack or appimage downloads work perfect ally.

The only exception is ham radio software. Here I tend to compile later versions if I need/want them.

Other negatives

I'm really not hugely into gaming. But use blender a lot. Due to this I use Nvidia cards as they are far better supported by blender.

Installing the proprietary Nvidia drivers is a bit of a pain on Debian for newbies. But once you know the process its simple enough. Just not obvious for beginners. The community drivers are still very limited thanks to Nvidia s weird ideas.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago

Fedora Gnome. I like it and it just works for my daily office use. I don't have the time nor the mental strength to fiddle with different distro's on a regular basis.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago

Fedora strikes a good balance for me. I come from arch and opensuse. I like the stability of fedora, but I like that it also gets updates faster than Debian. Most software I have found has Fedora considerations.

However, I have been using Ubuntu LTS for my self hosted media server.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Slackware: because I'm old and arch is too trendy.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I run SteamOS on desktop hardware because I hate windows and it solves almost every Linux gaming problem out of the box...

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago

Arch. Started using it in high school. Never had a reason to switch. Now I'm just regularly frustrated by other distros trying to make things easier by abstracting simple configurations behind layers of custom scripts.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago

Fedora because it has (IMO) the best vanilla GNOME experience. Every application is in the same theme and looks similar.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

OpenSUSE Tumbleweed, because it has been the most stable and flexible experience I've had that worked out of the box. I have tried a lot of distros over the years, and openSUSE has really held up.

Additionally, I use Nobara for a multi-purpose machine that I also occasionally use for gaming (that's why Nobara instead of openSUSE: it gets me slightly higher %1 lows and is less effort to set up for gaming) and a Void Linux machine for programming. Nobara is pretty good, by far the best gaming oriented distro I've tried, but I do regret that it's Fedora based. Void is really fantastic, but for some reason it only boots on my System76 laptop, so that's the only device I use it on 🤷.

Void is an arch-killer for me; it's faster, has huge repos, and offers a similar experience. I honestly prefer it, and would probably use it on most of my machines if it weren't for the booting issue (it's been a few months since I last tried, so things might have changed though). OpenSUSE is king for low-effort stability and flexibility though.

Well, those are my two cents. Good day y'all!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

NixOS, because:

  • I can have my entire system be declaratively configured, and not as a yaml soup bolted onto a random distro.
  • I can trivially separate the OS, and the data (thanks, impermanence)
  • it has a buttload of packages and integration modules
  • it is mostly reproducible

All of these combined means my backups are simple (just snapshot /persist, with a few dirs excluded, and restic them to N places) and reliable. The systems all have that newly installed feel, because there is zero cruft accumulating.

And with the declarative config being tangled out from a literate Org Roam garden, I have tremendous, and up to date documentation too. Declarative config + literate programmung work really well together, amg give me immense power.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago

I use popos because I own a system 76 and it's what I'm used to.

[–] tiddy 9 points 1 week ago

Nixos because... I feel like were already loud enough of a crowd everyone should know its benefits lol

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Fedora (workstation) is the first distro I actually managed to daily drive. Its modern, stable, and I didnt have to spend to much time in getting everything to work how I want it. Tried some distros in the past but they never stuck (Ubuntu, mint, popOS).

Curious about arch but I think I will stick Fedora for now.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Guix because I love the idea behind Nix but Nixlang is the most painful language I've ever had to type out.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Linux Mint is a nice and easy distro that is quite good :D

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] captain_aggravated 8 points 1 week ago

On my main desktop I'm using Fedora KDE. Arrived here by process of elimination.

Linux Mint Cinnamon didn't run particularly well with my hardware, I was looking for a distro with decent Wayland support so I could run my high refresh rate monitor properly. So that pretty much meant a switch to KDE. So who's implementation of KDE?

I've spent much of my time on the Ubuntu side of things, but Canonical has been pulling so much diet Microsoft shit that I'd rather not use any of the *buntus themselves, so Kubuntu is out. Neon? Kubuntu again. I'm not terribly interested in the forks of forks of forks of forks, I've been around long enough to go "Remember PeppermintOS? You don't, okay." So I'm looking for something fairly near the root of its tree.

I've never really seen the appeal of Arch and every time I've tried running Manjaro it failed to function, so forget that. I don't know shit about SuSe, that basically left Fedora. So here I am.

[–] buffysummers 8 points 1 week ago

I use Fedora. No real reason in particular (I do like yum/dnf a lot), I just think it's neat.

I've used Arch in the past as well.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Because despite all the people telling me I'm wrong, Kubuntu is still by far the best distro I've ever used. Rock solid, super fast, and continues to improve.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Void for desktop/laptop. These are the things I like about it.

  • Rolling release
  • Initial installation is minimal, and doesn't foist a specific DE or other unessential software on me.
  • No systemd
  • Nothing similar to Arch's AUR. I know a lot of people love it, but I do not. I mention as the distros are similar.

Debian for my server. But I plan to migrate to Devuan.

  • Stable and well tested
  • Huge package selection
  • Pretty ubiquitously supported. If for whatever reason what you want to run isn't in the repo, .deb packages and apt repos are often available.
  • Minimal installation available.
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Arch: I have the most up to date computer in the whole world, I have the AUR, no one can stop me

switches to Debian

Debian: My packages are so stable, nothing can break the eternal peace of my system's packages

switches back to Arch

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago

Fedora. Reason is probably that im used to it now. But if I have to make some points why then there they are:

  • nice balance between being up-to-date and not bleeding edge
  • new technologies. Fedora always pushes new technologies first such as wayland, pipewire, systemd... I like it. I dont have to wait 2 years until x distro rolls it. I get it now, sometimes with some problems but nothing that i couldnt manage.
  • When im trying out some software or building from source the documentation often includes specific steps for fedora (among debian, ubuntu and arch). Its really nice to not be a niche distro and get instructions tailored for fedora. Also some pre build packages are often in deb and rpm. -im used to dnf and its few handy commands like dnf history etc. Im sure that other package managers offer similar solutions but i know dnf and it feels like home
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

openSUSE, because of the snapshotting. It's zero-setup and just gives peace of mind when doing upgrades, as I can roll back even from the bootloader.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Mint cuz I'm a newbie and it was recommended.

I tried KDE Neon Plasma a while too and it was doing a weird stuttery jitter thing with the mouse that I didn't like so I switched back.

Mint just hasn't had any huge frustrating problems or anything wrong with it that I couldn't fix in the settings menu. Just how I like it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›