What do you consider to be the “Goldilocks” distro? the one that balances ease of install and use, up-to-date, stability, speed, etc… You get the idea.

I’m not a newb, these last few years I’ve lived in the Debian and derivatives side of things, but I’ve used RH, Slackware, Puppy :), and older stuff, like mandrake/mandriva and others. Never tried Suse or Arch, and while Nix looks appealing, I need something to put in production rapidly. I have tried Kinoite in a VM, but I couldn’t install something (which I can’t remember), and that turned me off.

Oh I’m on Mint right now, because lazy, but it’s acting up with a couple of VMs, which I need, I really don’t have the time or desire to maybe spend two days troubleshooting, and I’m a bit fed up with out of date pkgs.

  • LeFantome@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 days ago

    Sounds like you want EndeavourOS.

    Installs in a few minutes to a fully configured and usable desktop environment of your choice. It is Arch ( uses the same packages, uses the same kernel, has access to the AUR ). A huge benefit of the Arch repos is the up-to-date package universe as well everything you are likely to want being in the repo or AUR.

    Don’t underestimate the maintenance and reliability benefits of not having to cobble stuff together from multiple sources.

  • gramgan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    7 days ago

    NixOS. Declarative system management is just so unbelievably simple and reliable that I couldn’t ever see myself going back to a traditional Linux system.

    • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 days ago

      NixOS is too different and poorly documented for me to call it the true goldilocks distro, but man am I loving it

    • Neo@lemmy.hacktheplanet.be
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      I’m building a batteries included desktop OS based on NixOS. A bit like ZorinOS, ChromeOS or Mint but with NixOS as a base. It’s a bit ambitious and still in an early stage, but it’s been great fun for me using the Nix package manager as a solid tool to build stuff. Check it out at https://nixup.io/ or https://github.com/nixup-io/desk-os if you’re curious. Anyone with the nix package manager installed and flakes enabled can just execute nix run github:nixup-up/desk-os to spin up a VM with a demo.

  • Tundra@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    6 days ago

    Debian Stable + flatpaks. If I were to install it again, I would probably use spiral Linux.

    I’ve moved to cachyOS, I’ve been getting into running local AI, and they offer an optional prebuilt SDK.

    (with Debian I would have to install CUDA myself, which would cause issues on kernel updates)

  • iopq@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    NixOS is super easy. It gets a bit complicated when you use flakes, but you don’t need to to start.

    You just put the system packages into the configuration so you can replicate that system everywhere.

    But if you don’t care, just install everything to the user profile! It just works like any distro then, no config files to mess with

    The first power spike you will experience is actually setting up a service like Jellyfin by just editing the configuration.nix, though. It’s so much easier than having to mess with the configuration yourself (someone already did the work for you)

  • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    7 days ago

    If you’re lazy (which I take to mean you like low maintenance) and haven’t tried a rolling release distro, you need to try Manjaro. It’s downstream of Arch (like Mint vs Debian) but with a lot of QoL improvements that take the edge off.

    It’s"Goldilocks" for me because it’s rolling and has recent packages but also very low maintenance. I was sick of 3rd-party repo incompatibilies and update issues on Ubuntu.

    It’s a curated take on Arch in that it sources packages from Arch but holds them back until they’re in a decent shape. Recent example was the Plasma 6 which they’ve held back a couple of months until most bugs had been cleared, but normally they release packages on a 2 week cycle.

    It works out of the box, keeps working indefinitely (5 years going for me), and they have integrated system snapshots if you use BTRFS for root, just in case (automatically takes snapshots before every update, which you can restore from Grub). Never had to use a snapshot (did it only once to see if it works).

    Limitations of Manjaro compared to Arch:

    • Not as bleeding edge due to holding packages for a while.
    • You have to stick to their way of doing stuff, like their tools for graphics drivers and kernel management.
    • You have to stick to a LTS kernel or at least keep one installed as backup at all times.
    • It won’t change your kernel major version for you, ever. Some people see this as a disadvantage, personally I greatly prefer it.
    • You have to stick to their stable package repo. If you use their unstable/testing repos all bets are off (which is not going to be news to someone familiar with Debian).
    • You get access to the AUR but the usual warnings apply since AUR is even wilder than Sid. Some people say they’ve ran into trouble installing some AUR packages on Manjaro due to missing dependencies. It’s never happened to me but I can see how it could happen due to the package delay.
    • You can’t say “I use Arch btw”. Arch fans tend to hate Manjaro because they see its limitations and hand-holding as antithetical to Arch’s goals.

    Regarding that last point, there’s a very vocal minority that will smear Manjaro any chance they get All I can say is, try it for yourself.

    • Quazatron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      I can confirm it works as advertised, has very low maintenance and good performance.

      I use it for gaming with Steam, Heroic, Lutris and a bunch of emulators, web browsing, some light development and home lab.

    • steeznson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      The Manjaro team have had well publicised mistakes in the past which I think the community were right to highlight. However to be fair to them it was like a decade ago they had the PGP one, and they seem to have become a more professional outfit since then.

      • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 days ago

        All distributions make mistakes. It’s a complex job. Debian stable had a local root elevation exploit on for a while a couple of months ago and nobody batted an eye. People would have a field day if that happened to Manjaro.

        It’s a double standard borne out of the resentment of a vocal minority and that sucks. The Linux community wastes so much energy on these pointless feuds. (And then they wonder why there’s never the year of the Linux desktop…) Linux and FOSS are not about treating user share as a zero sum game but unfortunately there are people who can only think in terms of “if you use another distro you’re dumb and I must ridicule you”.

        It’s an especially narrow-minded take with distros like Manjaro, which is different enough from Arch that its users were never going to use Arch anyway.

  • Clearwater@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    7 days ago

    Arch, because I use niche software and the AUR doesn’t always get along with Manjaro very well (ungoogled-chromium-bin is the worst offender). Switched to arch, configured it identically to my manjaro install, and all has been well.

  • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    7 days ago

    Great question. Right up there with “what’s the best movie” or “which meal should I order”. Maybe you want to ask which editor is the best too?

    • Mr_Blott@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 days ago

      The question starts with “What do you consider…”

      You sound like the type to reply in threads where someone’s asking about a problem they’re having with Windows and say “I don’t have this problem because I use Linux (snort)”

  • TurboWafflz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 days ago

    For me it’s either OpenSUSE Tumbleweed or Arch and I can never decide which. Tumbleweed having snapper and YaST everything out of the box is amazing but sometimes I miss the AUR, and Zypper is so much slower than Pacman. I also really like Fedora Silverblue on my laptop but I don’t think I could use it on my main system.

  • RmDebArc_5@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    For me that would be Fedora (preferably KDE). I currently am on Aurora (Kinoite fork), but that’s because I value stability very highly (except for immutable and Debian nothing is stable enough).

    • Amju Wolf@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      Regular Fedora is more than stable enough for day to day use. I’d start there and then with use see if it’s a good fit.

    • Omega_Jimes@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      I’ve enjoyed my time on fedora. It’s recent enough that my hardware works when I upgrade, and stable and supported enough that I haven’t had to go out of my way to get something working.

    • RageLtd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Not OP, but can you sell me on Aurora? Every time I’ve tried any of the Fedora Immutable distros they just feel slow and awkward. I have a few tools that need rpm-ostree installs and fighting with flatpak permissions is the bane of my existence

      • RmDebArc_5@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        If you had problems with fedora atomic aurora likely isn’t for you. Its main changes are adding stuff like codecs and drivers to the image and making distrobox more accessible. What tools do you use? Aurora-dx comes with brew preinstalled so maybe they are available there. Also using distrobox completely skips flatpak permissions so maybe that would help you

        • RageLtd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 days ago

          Well that certainly sounds like it’s worth investigating, at the very least. Thanks!

          The big problem for me was SSH and IDE tools. Iirc they only worked with stuff installed on the base image (I use 1Password’s ssh agent)

          • j0rge@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 days ago

            bluefin/aurora co-maintainer here, the 1password ssh agent is a miniboss we haven’t conquered yet, just a heads up.

            • RageLtd@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 days ago

              Thanks for your fantastic work! I actually successfully moved both my laptop and desktop to ublue distros last night!

              It turns out Bazzite was the image for me though, far easier to layer VSCode and 1Password onto Bazzite than getting steam working on Bluefin

          • erwan@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 days ago

            There are a few improvements in Aurora over Silverblue that you might like.

            It ships with homebrew which is perfect for CLI tools.

            It ships with distrobox instead of toolbx which is much better. You can install any distro while toolbx is just a Fedora. For example I’m using Arch in toolbox because of the number of packages and the fact that they’re usually up to date (no need to wait for a major release).

            So far I never had to use rpm-ostree, and for VSCode I use distrobox precisely because of the permissions.

              • RageLtd@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 days ago

                For anyone following this thread, I successfully moved my gaming desktop and my framework laptop to Bazzite last night!

                I initially went with Bluefin, but it was easier to layer VSCode and 1Password onto Bazzite than it was to get Steam working on Bluefin

  • superkret@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    Debian. I run Stable on servers and Unstable on desktops.
    Although I do think OpenSUSE Tumbleweed and Arch are actually better in many aspects, I find Tumbleweed too rough around the edges (it’s a derivative of Leap and that shows). And I just can’t be bothered to install and configure Arch anymore. Fedora and Ubuntu are too buggy on average, Mint is too “stable” for a desktop and I don’t use all the helpers that make it newbie-friendly. Slackware suffers from issues that were solved in the Linux world decades ago, and I dislike derivative distros on principle.

    I’ve probably tried around 30-40 distros and I always return to Debian.

    • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      For years I used Debian. Because it worked, but also because Debian looked to me to be the purest and most solid FOSS distro. That is, it’s not run by a for-profit company, and it isn’t a derivative that will go away one day. It looked - still looks - like the “universal” Linux distro, which I believe is even its motto.

      Firstly, is that assessment justified?

      Next: the problem. A few years ago I read a disturbing report about the behind-the-scenes dysfunction at Debian. Specifically:

      • a serious dearth of maintainers
      • lots of very outdated packages with possible untreated security holes
      • silly political wrangling by Debian insiders - one representative allegation was that more time was being spent debating the positioning of a Black Lives Matter logo on the Debian site than on the technical challenges just mentioned

      Possibly this was disinformation by someone with a scurrilous agenda. I want it not to be true because I believe Linux needs a flagship FOSS distro and Debian is the obvious candidate.

      Can anyone set the record straight? Because when I had to do a new install I went with Ubuntu (LTS), and this was partly inspired by the above. I would really like all this to be wrong and to know that Debian is on the right path.

      • superkret@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        I looked behind the scenes quite a bit in Debian and what you say mirrors what I saw. The project is very political and does suffer from a serious lack of man-(and woman-)power in many areas. If you do want to help, you’re almost immediately hampered by the community’s Byzantine structure.

        If that puts you off, Arch is a more dynamic project that’s easier to get into as a maintainer. But it’s also organized with a more hierarchical and less democratic structure.

        Additionally, you’ll find the issues Debian has all over the FOSS world (The Linux kernel is especially bad). And if you work in corporate IT like I do, you’ll soon notice that proprietary software organisations are no better. There’s software many people depend on maintained by a single overworked and struggling person everywhere you look. Yet it still works somehow. Cause wherever there is demand, a solution is found. And Debian at least has a long-established structure with the goal of finding that solution, even though it’s antiquated.

          • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            7 days ago

            This is great news! Debian is back in contention for me.

            Recently Debian developer Helmut Grohne initiated the Debian development discussion around removing more packages from the unstable archive. He argued in favor of more aggressively removing unmaintained packages from the archive given the QA-related costs, additional work/complexities when dealing with major fundamental changes to Debian, and other non-trivial costs

        • JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          7 days ago

          Useful insight, thanks. And somewhat reassuring.

          I have no intention of using Arch (btw). I’m the kind of insufferable idealist who wants to use Debian for the high-minded principle of it. I consider Arch a toy distro for gamers. :)

      • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 days ago

        There’s truth to what you’re hearing, all open source software is suffering.

        Part of the allure of rolling releases for the places that have to maintain them is less maintaining! Debian does need maintainers.

        Debian does ship old packages, that’s the point of “stable”, to be tested and known not to cause problems.

        Free software is political. It’s literally not possible for there to have been more time spent discussing what to put on the website than looking for maintainers and updating packages, and part of stability isn’t active testing but instead time spent in active use.

        Debian is on the same path it’s always been on, and reports of its imminent demise are exaggerated.

      • cakeistheanswer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 days ago

        I use the Debian social contract as an example of the an unmitigated good in open source.

        That doesn’t mean the org always live up to it, but that’s partially why there are battles for things like representation inside. I wouldn’t extend the benefit of the doubt to canonical, and I prefer rolling as opposed to security ported updates on my own hardware, but they made what you see possible on the internet in large part because people came together to make a free platform.

        The orgs dogmas look like product of a bygone age to be, and changes to environment in software is probably as hostile to their approach as ever. I’m amazed they’re not more dysfunctional just from the outside looking, it’s a rock solid implementation.

      • superkret@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        Tumbleweed includes the YaST package manager with all the repository priority settings that make sense in Leap, but the TW documentation tells you not to use it.
        You can run zypper up which is a standard updating method in Leap, but the TW documentation tells you not to do that. More than half the zypper options make no sense in TW.
        That’s the stuff I mean by “derivative”. They built on a Leap base and modified it into a rolling release.
        If it was truly designed as a new, independent rolling release distro, they’d have taken those things out, packaged a different version of zypper or at least a different manpage.