If you got bored by Fedora is probably the right choice for you. Otherwise nothing compares to Arch, esp if you “I’m still learning and only know some basics, but I want to go deeper and really understand how things work under the hood.”. Another safer-nobrainer is Tumbleweed.
Using a filesystem which has NONE of modern features because you “noticed” performance tradeoffs…
Encryption in btrfs? https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Btrfs#Encryption
Ditch Debian. FreeBSD has the current version…
Its not about liking, its about how people use it and what for. AUR shouldn’t be used willynillyngly.
I agree, AUR and pacman (syntax) suck. Apart from that is Arch one of the best.
You misstyped fish.
Upvote for acknowledging this blatant flaw while working on everything else KDE does at the moment.
Keeping away from sudo, got it.
So why would somebody run that on their homeserver compared to tried and true staples with tons of documentation? 🍿
Running exotic niche server images out in the wild…
Wait your previous comment was not sarcastic? 😱
Such a bad comment, what does tinkering mean? Not use any software besides the default one? So only browsing and text apps? facepalm
In conclusion Fedora is the best libre Linux distributions out there.
Aha.
rofl, Fedora for EU what a joke…
AUR is not to be compared to arch packages.
Warning: AUR packages are user-produced content. These PKGBUILDs are completely unofficial and have not been thoroughly vetted. Any use of the provided files is at your own risk.-
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Arch_User_Repository
And exactly this is the reason it is its biggest flaw. People don’t read what AUR actually is.
Really good post and as a daily linux user for quite some time, I can relate.
I also strive for simplicity so I try to minimize the use of anything which isn’t in the official repos of a distribution. This is a big one, because depending on your use-case this trims down the applicable distros to your specific needs quite a bit. e.g. do you need up-to-date packages/firmware/drivers, you have to look at rolling-release distros. Do you not have these requirements and looking for stability then you can look at point releases (LTS) on the other side of the spectrum.
What most linux enthusiast forget to take into consideration is the willingness to use the command line. If you are very reluctant to use a terminal you should look e.h. for distros which give you the ability to configure almost everything through built-in GUIs e.g. OpenSuse’s Yast (Leap, Tumbleweed etc.) or Gnome focused distros (Ubuntu etc.) This also links into trying out the different package managers and their commands, some of them will seem more straightforward (apt install, zypper install) whereas others are more obfuscated (pacman -S, xbps-install). Searching for packages (apt search, zypper search, pacman -Ss/-Qs whatever, xbps-query)
In terms of desktop environments/window managers I also strive for simplicity, but I am willing to invest some time to setup the initial configuration. If you want something which works out of the box you need to try out different ones. KDE is a sure hit on most of those use-cases (esp. gaming, being very customizable although I’d recommend to not fiddle too much, similar workflow to Windows) if you feel comfortable with the workflow of Gnome, this might also be something for you (kind of tablet/phone). Otherwise go into the rabbit-hole of smaller WMs like openbox, labwc or if you are using terminal applications a lot, twms, i3, riverwm etc.
Love this guys, hope he lives forever!