Poll Time! 📝

Which one would you pick among these?

#linux

Debian-based Distro
48.6%
Arch-based Distro
25.5%
Fedora-based Distro
21.5%
Others
4.4%
Poll ended at .
@itsfoss Once I had to try andput together a .deb package I vowed to never touch anything that uses them ever again. Yeesh

@itsfoss For real, though. They'e so cursed. You have to write a hacky nonsense makefile that then relies on some weird stuff and... friend, this is like a fancy zip!

I'd been assembling RPMs for a while too to maintain out own private package repo, and they're so nicely behaved and well thought. The shock was so intense

@VileLasagna
I haven't tried building RPM's, but building Pacman .pkg files is quite nice.
If I had to build .deb packages, I would personally make an Arch package first, then convert it using fpm.
@itsfoss
@minecraftchest1 @itsfoss the only sane way I know it's to build them straight from CMake with.CPack.
Pacman pkg files are also pretty well behaved, yeah, they are fine. Arch is what I use on my personal computers and I have edited a few packages here and there
@itsfoss Arch-based, why? because AUR is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo good!
@nima @itsfoss I'm content with regular packages
@itsfoss Debian based... by which I mean, Debian.
@itsfoss right now I'm using #openSUSE but when Pop_OS updates and releases cosmic I'm jumping ship. Ubuntu based distros just work flawlessly on my laptop.
@itsfoss I chose fedora based.., but my heart wants someone to build a distro based on solus's eopkg packaging system. They had delta updates, building binaries were easy and often smaller than rpm. Their command line flags were more readable and practical than any other package manager I used. @Solus
@itsfoss Depends the use-case. Desktop is all Fedora for me. Servers is Debian
@itsfoss I’m most familiar with Debian based distros, so I generally stick with them. Though I have used Fedora a bit, and think it’s pretty good.
@keydelk Yes, best to go with whatever one is comfortable with!
@itsfoss for server, Debian based. For Desktop arch based. But only because I'm a developer and need the newest of the newest to make it more or less future proof.

@itsfoss Is “All of the above” an option?

For me it’s been Debian for ABSOLUTE stability, Fedora for stability with new features, and Arch for fun, but the rise of immutable distros may change that.

@itsfoss I would pick any of those and others, for different reasons.
@itsfoss Probably some elite arch guy will say you are not Arch user but I am using Garuda Kde Dragonized Edition. Building grub and syncing sanpshots to grub was a painfull problem to me on Debian. So when they told me "Look auto snapper probably a normie can't build" I was be like but I don't want to download apps with terminal :(" and they said Octopi and Bauh... This is enough. I am using Arch. Also I like distro tools. When I was using Deb based I was on MX Linux cause of that.
@MKR1381 @itsfoss I use arch and I like the package manager :3
@itsfoss
I tend to agree with you there. Microsoft has become a burden to operate, constant updates that take forever to install, reboots, sometimes a couple of reboots, and when that's done you can't remember what you started doing in the first place.
@itsfoss If by based you mean based on, and specifically excluding the actual distro, then debian.
@itsfoss Debian! FOSS for life
@georgebmillion_com @itsfoss what DE do you use with Debian?
@paulhulford @itsfoss
I don't use a DE only a WM; I use i3. But when I do use a DE it's KDE; because it's beautiful.
@itsfoss It really depends on the purpose. If it an always on server or a production machine it is debian based, for personal use it's Arch.