Linux

49841 readers

877 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

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

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

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Help for searching a new distro [SOLVED] (lemmy.ml)

submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

28 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hi everyone. I have an old ASUS S56C and I use it everyday for web (Firefox) and graphic design (Photoshop with Bottles, Inkscape). I have used for years Lubuntu, and it was all good with LXDE ambient, but with the latest versions it switched to LXQT and with snaps I don't feel it comfortable anymore.

So, I'm looking for another ~~easy weight~~ lightweight distro, no fancy, only for Firefox, Bottles and Inkscape. I'm opened to any suggestions. Thanks in advance to everyone.

EDIT: Thank you all for your time and answers. I've read them all and I think I will start with Debian with LXDE. Thank you all again.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Arch is more cutting edge and thus less stable in very general terms. And is would be a learning curve for someone used to Debian based distros.

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

Everybody keeps saying that.

But when I used Ubuntu/Debian and it had a major bug in the software that I used, which made it completely unusable, I had to wait for half a year for the next release which included the bugfix. But then it also included new bugs in other things... It was mostly broken at any point in time, bUt At LeAsT iTs sTabLe

[–] [email protected] 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I mean, bugs are a part of all software. Stability is about reliability. That if you boot up your computer you are less likely to spend the first hour or two troubleshooting unless you just did a major upgrade. I'm not saying Arch is unstable, just less stable.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

Ubuntu was reliably bugged and I could not use the software I needed for work because of that. I had to fuck with it on a monthly basis to fix it.

Arch reliably works and is always up to date, so bugs that I experience get fixed in a timely manner.

I never had to fix it after an update. On my personal PC I have the same arch install since 2020.

Never ever did my arch not boot or not work after an update.

I literally have a web server with arch that runs automatic daily unsupervised updates (which is not recommended by arch devs tbh.) And it has been serving my personal homepage for a year without downtime or maintenance (except for 15sec post update reboots ofc.).

If you want to go beyond personal anecdotes as evidence, we both would need to conduct a significant study.

But I feel like people keep saying that arch is unstable without trying it themselves or without looking at data.