aliceif, 2 months ago

@fell @unsungnovelty that article is a waste of electrons for this alone in the honorable mentions

fell, 2 months ago

@aliceif @unsungnovelty I have never tried PopOS. I don't have an opinion about it.

soulsource, 2 months ago

@fell @Mastodon I think point 3 of the checklist is a matter of taste though. Some users might enjoy regular updates to their desktop. Others might be more content with a desktop that does not change for several years and only gets security updates.

sjb, 2 months ago

@soulsource @fell @Mastodon I went for Debian Stable.

unsungnovelty, 2 months ago

@sjb @soulsource @fell @Mastodon I have genuine reasons though:

👉 Distros using outdated kernels & NOT LTS versions in point releases.
👉 Cherry picked security patches from new stable versions. Eg; firefox v123 to firefox v119. This has introduced security issues in the past.
👉 Duplicated effort for same bugs by distro devs during backporting.
👉 Snaps & flatpaks are bloated solutions for rolling release in point realeases.
👉 Buggy software

Solution? Update the packages in a rolling release.

unsungnovelty, 2 months ago

@sjb @soulsource @fell @Mastodon We also have evolved a lot in the past decade. I often feel point releases breaks more in the most basic things unlike rolling in some weird bugs.

Maybe I should add a managed rolling release distro like Endeavour, Void or OpenSUSE tumbleweed instead of just Arch Linux? Arch is a DIY distro. Point release people will have better experience with a managed rolling release distro.

But I don't have enough experience with them to recommend. I'll try make some. :)

fell, 2 months ago

@unsungnovelty @sjb @soulsource Apart from the ones you mentioned, I think OpenSUSE Tumbleweed is the most interesting.