Linux Discussion

[maflynn]

I saw a different distr

I don't think it was tested long enough

That's been the criticism for CachyOS over other arch based distros.

If anything, this is what I believe pushed some cachyos users over to EndeavourOS, manjaro, and of course Arch.

 

[boswald]

I saw a different distr

That's been the criticism for CachyOS over other arch based distros.

If anything, this is what I believe pushed some cachyos users over to EndeavourOS, manjaro, and of course Arch.

I've always wanted to try Arch, but I feel like I'd spend more time tweaking it than using it. Cachy does all that for me so I can just install games and go.

 

[CasualFanboy]

I've always wanted to try Arch, but I feel like I'd spend more time tweaking it than using it. Cachy does all that for me so I can just install games and go.

Everyone has their personal threshold, and for me, Arch definitely exceeds that. In my experience, your concern is valid. Constant high-maintenance, reading announcements before changing or updating anything, etc. Maybe 15 years ago, when I was still eagerly learning and exploring Linux, it was fun. Now.... it seems pointless.

 

[maflynn]

I've always wanted to try Arch, but I feel like I'd spend more time tweaking it than using it. Cachy does all that for me so I can just install games and go.

That's my take away.

What CachyOS provides, is a fully functional, fully built out OS ready to be used. To steal a phrase "it just works" You install it, load the gaming meta packages, and your up and running in under 20 minutes. A completely featured, functional system.

Arch, is a blank slate, where you need to go through every little thing during the install, i.e., running terminal commands for your wifi network, configuring it, enabling it and logging into it. Lots of scripts, conf file edits and terminal commands. The odds are high you'll get something wrong, or the system will throw an error for unknown reasons (to you). This approach offers a great way to learn the ins and outs of linux and you get to utter the phrase btw, I use Arch 😛

Long story short, at least in my mind - If the goal is for you to learn the nuts and bolts of linux, Arch is your baby. If you want a system up and running in under a 1/2 hour, Cachy cannot be beat

 

[S.B.G]

I like the rolling release method that Arch uses; I'm that nuts and bolts guy who enjoys configuring everything to my liking. That's why when I landed on Arch during my distro-hopping days I never left it.

One thing that users can do to dull that bleeding edge Arch kernel that can, at times, break things is to wait 48-72 hours before installing it. The Arch community is fast at identifying broken things and they post about it right away.

Another thing is to not run the main kernel and instead install the linux-lts kernel. LTS tracks a long-term support kernel that receives only security and driver backports. You keep both linux and linux-lts installed, configure your bootloader to show both, and you always have a known-good fallback.

The beauty of Linux, I think, is that we have unlimited choices. If Arch isn't your thing, maybe Debian, or Ubuntu are better. I love that; choose your package manager style, then choose your environment and off you go.

 

[Steve Adams]

I like the rolling release method that Arch uses; I'm that nuts and bolts guy who enjoys configuring everything to my liking. That's why when I landed on Arch during my distro-hopping days I never left it.

One thing that users can do to dull that bleeding edge Arch kernel that can, at times, break things is to wait 48-72 hours before installing it. The Arch community is fast at identifying broken things and they post about it right away.

Another thing is to not run the main kernel and instead install the linux-lts kernel. LTS tracks a long-term support kernel that receives only security and driver backports. You keep both linux and linux-lts installed, configure your bootloader to show both, and you always have a known-good fallback.

The beauty of Linux, I think, is that we have unlimited choices. If Arch isn't your thing, maybe Debian, or Ubuntu are better. I love that; choose your package manager style, then choose your environment and off you go.

I agree. I am not deep into linux. So I judge distros by how they work. i still don't know what each is actually running. I like Mint, Zorin, I wish the developer of PearOS had more backup to get everything running smoothly, that's cool. I have not tried catchy, bazzite, etc. They all seem to be popular choices as well.

I am running Zorin and it's great. I am probably going to pay for the Pro version to support them, and get the few extra theme choices.

We are going away for the night to visit our son, My windows laptop and iPad are staying home and instead I am taking my linux machine with me to see how it goes for a travel companion.

 

[maflynn]

5 things that are surprisingly easier on Linux than Windows

Here's a summary from the article

1. You can update all your apps at once
2. Bulk remove apps at once
3. A broken Linux system is much easier to recover
4. Backups that make sense
5. Running a home server

 

[maflynn]

I like the rolling release method that Arch uses; I'm that nuts and bolts guy who enjoys configuring everything to my liking. That's why when I landed on Arch during my distro-hopping days I never left it.

One thing that users can do to dull that bleeding edge Arch kernel that can, at times, break things is to wait 48-72 hours before installing it. The Arch community is fast at identifying broken things and they post about it right away.

I definitely prefer rolling releases, as previously noted, but I think there's two major issues with AUR that cause me to rethink my embrace of an Arch based distro.

First has already been mentioned multiple times, the lax oversight and management of the repository. From what I've been reading the specific malware technique that was employed which infected 1,500 packages was easily identified, and a script was used to clean those up. Then a day later, more malware was found, but not the same method. So its going to be a case of whack-a-mole moving forward.

Second the fact that AUR packages are built on your computer. You are executing build instructions written by another user on your own machine. You're basically trusting a stranger's scripts and unlike Fedora's RPM repository, there's no official auditing/reviewing .

I'm currently debating whether I want to stick with an Arch based distro. I've started testing out Fedora on Gnome boxes, and if things go positively, I'll move to install it on my thinkpad for testing purposes

 

[S.B.G]

I definitely prefer rolling releases, as previously noted, but I think there's two major issues with AUR that cause me to rethink my embrace of an Arch based distro.

First has already been mentioned multiple times, the lax oversight and management of the repository. From what I've been reading the specific malware technique that was employed which infected 1,500 packages was easily identified, and a script was used to clean those up. Then a day later, more malware was found, but not the same method. So its going to be a case of whack-a-mole moving forward.

Second the fact that AUR packages are built on your computer. You are executing build instructions written by another user on your own machine. You're basically trusting a stranger's scripts and unlike Fedora's RPM repository, there's no official auditing/reviewing .

I'm currently debating whether I want to stick with an Arch based distro. I've started testing out Fedora on Gnome boxes, and if things go positively, I'll move to install it on my thinkpad for testing purposes

On your first point, you're right. But the same is said for all software versus malware: it's a cat and mouse game. Some of those games are easier played for the bad guys more than others.

On your second point, the AUR is optional; no one has to use it if they don't want to. When I checked my system last week and I found that even after all the years of using Arch, I only had 5 programs from the AUR on the machine.

When installing Arch, the AUR is not installed by default, the user must enable it.

Optionally, instead of using the AUR if there is a package you need/want you can go to the source on Github or Gitlab and inspect every file of the program there. You can download the code there and install it yourself outside of the AUR.

 

[maflynn]

the same is said for all software versus malware: it's a cat and mouse game. Some of those games are easier played for the bad guys more than others.

Without question,, but I'd rather not make it easier for the bad actors to attack my machine and the deficiencies of AUR do just that

On your second point, the AUR is optional; no one has to use it if they don't want to. When I checked my system last week and I found that even after all the years of using Arch, I only had 5 programs from the AUR on the machine.

I won't disagree with you, it is optional until it isn't, i.e., something you need/want is only found there.

Regrading Fedora, I'll want to do a compare/contrast and see how it works compared against cachyos. One of the features that Cachy brings to the table is the idea of a fully configured system - "It just works" type of thing. Fedora is the typical Linux distro, a blank slate for you to build upon though much of the foundation has been laid.

I've got Fedora running in a VM, it has the grub bootmanager and btrfs file system. Unlike CachyOS, snapshots are not enabled by default, it looks like I'll need to also use COPR, Fedoras user repository that has a higher risk profile then RPM. If I'm not materially increasing the security of my system (because I have to use COPR) what am I truley gaining?

Edit: let me add, that while I wouldn't quantify it as a mass exodus, there's a fair amount of chatter regarding people looking at Fedora, and/or switching from CachyOS to Fedora. I guess you can now count me in as one of those

 

[Steve Adams]

I am just waiting till we move, I am going to buy a new computer for myself and my wife (she gets two since she does not have a desktop currently. I will then take my current Dell that's slowly dying, re install Linux Zorin on it and really give it a whirl. I should be able to install Affinity on that one to try.

I am more than likely going to get the P14 or Surface laptop Ultra as my system and the wifey will get the new Jade Surface laptop or A14.

 

[Steve Adams]

Sitting in the hotel room here now on the little dell. I have it plugged in and on performance mode on Zorin. I don't miss windows or MacOS right now. I probably would if I wanted to work on my clothing design files, but other than that I can do everything on this little system.

Come on Affinity, get your act together and release a Linux version.

 

[y2kpanic]

I wanted a thread to discuss the pros and cons of the various Linux Distros

Here's a good site to try the distros without needing to download a live usb - https://distrosea.com/

What I've installed/tried:
PopOS 24.04 LTS, based on Ununtu 24.04, it introduces a new Desktop Environment - Cosmic. Previously their Cosmic environment was a heavily customized gnome DE. Complaints of a lot of little and not so little issues. Fair amount of complaints about Cosmic not being ready and is largely a beta. Also being based off of an older LTS, with Ubuntu 25.04 around the corner, its a valid criticism.

Fedora 43. this distro updates every six months, potential of an updte impacting ssystem stability is high, gnome is completly vanilla, the distro is seemingly geared to the more experienced Linux user. I've had personal experience where updates did break the system. I'm also more familiar with apt-get, though I'm sure dnf is not that much different.

I'm installing Ubuntu right now.
The upside of this version (Ubuntu 25.10) is I get a lot of what will be in the up and coming LTS version, so I can upgrade to 26.04 LTS in a few months if I stick with Ubuntu. Downsides, Ubuntu pushes snap, where as others push flatpacks but I can add flatpack support.

For my perspective, I'll be considering Fedora vs. Ubuntu. I think PopOS is out, though I do like the cosmic DE, its just not ready for prime time, plus its on an older code base. I don't think I'll try or consider any other of the Ubuntu derivatives/forks.

Started using Linux a couple years ago after buying a Steam Deck, and proceeded to distro hop a bit. After reading PrivSec's article on Linux Insecurities, I pretty much stuck with a Fedora-based distro called Secureblue and kept my distro hopping isolated to KVM/QEMU.

Secureblue is immutable and atomic, applies SELinux policies, disables many modules by default, enables hardened_malloc, hardens the Kernel, and comes with a hardened Chromium-based browser inspired by GrapheneOS's Vanadium browser. Not to mention they have a ton of ujust scripts that allow you to re-enable many of said modules or other features. They strike a good balance between security and functionality on desktop Linux.

 

[maflynn]

I pretty much stuck with a Fedora-based distro called Secureblue

What do you use your linux system for?

I started googling it, and found this youtube. Seems like more trouble then its worth

 

[maflynn]

Interesting thread I found in the arch sub (link below)

In all honesty, I've rarely seen such honesty and helpfulness. Basically the people responding (in the arch sub) telling the OP that fedora is probably the best bet for him. Like most online sites, you would have expected the replies defending the OS that the site is based on, i.e., Arch people promoting Arch as the answer.

I generally see this in the cachyos forum, marginalizing other distro, and promoting cachy. Nothing unexpected, we all suffer from choice bias. Regardless I found the people responding in the ach sub refreshing

I will say while this reddit thread isn't very large it did strike a chord with me. While I like the idea of rolling release because in my mind I feel smaller releases as updates are made available is safer then one larger update every 6 months where everything changes. Yet with that said, it seems the kde plasma 6.7 rollout on cachy highlights what can and does go wrong when you push updates out quickly.

https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/1ub5xdr/deciding_distros

I would not recommend Arch if your main concern is stability and you aren't necessarily looking for access to the latest versions of software or a very specific package that isn't available on other distros. I'm saying this as an Arch user, it's just a conflict of interests

I would recommend you check out something like Fedora first

 

[y2kpanic]

What do you use your linux system for?

I started googling it, and found this youtube. Seems like more trouble then its worth

I just use it as an appliance for very basic stuff like gaming, web browsing, and web apps for Discord, YouTube, etc. Though, now that I'm using a Mac full time, it's relegated to any games that aren't compatible on macOS/Crossover.

The trouble was half the fun for me. I was still new to Linux and by that point I had tried traditional distros, immutables, atomics, Nix, etc. I saw this as just another type of distro to learn; ended up finding it really interesting so I stuck with it.

 

[capamac]

I used Linux as my sole system 2007-2011 ... I used Linux for *everything*. Web browsing, terminal, irc, edited one short video, games (was into Wolfenstein Enemy Territory at the time), photo editing (Gimp), some other stuff. It was my only home system so it did it all. I only switched back to MacBooks after 2011 coz I wanted Adobe InDesign ... the UI for Scribus (pagination software similar to InDesign) on Linux didn't really impress me. I was generally quite content with Linux. I don't use InDesign any more. I plan on returning to Linux/BSD whenever I decide it's time to move on from this Macbook Air M1. Then I'll be Linux-only once again.

 

[Steve Adams]

Like myself Capamac. I am windows full time, always have been. I dabbled in MacOS 3 different times, taking a loss and returning to windows. Now, I am using my little linux system more and more, but the lack off affinity keeps me on windows. But if it weren't for that I would be able to be linux 100 percent and be happy.

I had mint installed on my old Compaq business laptop back in 2009 for my son to watch baby einstien videos on when we were feeding him. He loved those videos. Mint back then was better than windows. It felt alot like xp at the time.