I’m having problems with Manjaro again, always after those big updates. Anyway, I’m moving from Manjaro since it seems it will not work (authorization isn’t working properly). I already tried Ubuntu before (used it for 3 months), but moved on since file management in Ubuntu is pretty bad (had to use terminal to copy files and format drives because system wouldn’t recognize me as administrator). I’ve been using Manjaro for 4 months and it’s really good, the update problems ruin it.

Anyway, I was thinking of moving on to something like Linux Mint, Debian or Fedora. I wanted something with support and with people that care for the code. What do you guys suggest? I ask because I don’t want to encounter another distro changing problem with my next distro.

  • hanabatake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    I absolutely agree with this and like to add the following. The ‘updates’ argument is spot on and there are in my opinion only two ways to do updating that are viable:

    1. Rolling releases that update as soon as upstream pushes an update (that’s basically what Arch Linux, openSUSE Tumbleweed, and Void Linux are doing)
    2. Backporting security patches, this is a lot of effort and as far as I know only SUSE, Red Hat, Canonical, and the Debian community are doing this reliably.

    Anyone else who claims to have a ‘stable release’ very likely doesn’t do either of these or ship something the aforementioned are shipping (maybe repackaged, themed and (in Manjaro’s and Mint’s case e.g.) held back for a while for no apparent reason.) My advice for beginners would therefore be: Pick a distro that provides with a release cycle that you like: 1. very slow, only security patches in between releases: e.g. Debian, openSUSE Leap 2. frequent releases, very close to upstream release cycle: e.g. Fedora 3. rolling release: openSUSE Tumbleweed, Arch Linux (the latter has a rather steep learning curve).

    Stick to the aforementioned upstream distros for the following reasons: 1. Security 2. Ease of getting help (huge communities, good wikis/manuals, close to upstream) 3. Longevity (as we’ve seen, these one-man-distros like Antergos or SwagArch, … can and will disappear at any time) 4. You will be actually more helpful to the Linux community (you can and should file bug reports to the packagers, if you find a bug in a ‘distro’ that neither has own packages nor a bug tracker if you find a bug your only hope is that it will be fixed upstream, if it exists there at all).

    Most ‘downstream distros’ are nothing but a ‘themed install’ with ‘preinstalled codecs’ Debian/Fedora/openSUSE do not provide ootb for legal/ideological reasons. Most of the time you can replicate their look and feel by installing a new theme and changing the wallpaper and a few settings. My adive: Go for vanilla openSUSE/Fedora/Debian/Arch and change those things yourself. It’s a good way to learn stuff that is not too hard to learn and you will have a more reliable system, too.

    source: u/xaverh on https://libredd.it/r/FindMeADistro/comments/cyn0hw/why_you_shouldnt_use_manjaro/

    I also agree with @Aiwendil@lemmy.ml, you shouldn’t distro hop and try to fix your issues

    • a_Ha
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      you shouldn’t ditro distro hop
      (otherwise great, thanks)