Anything even tangential to Red Hat.
RPM's are hot garbage when it comes to packaging formats.
Having said that, I use Fedora at work and Ubuntu at home.
this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
283 points (96.7% liked)
Linux
53502 readers
1780 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Whyfore the hate for .rpms? I've never had an issue on Fedora in a decade.
Issues with building RPM's. There's no specification for what an RPM is (unlike say deb).
Well the specification is "whatever rpmbuild version x.y.z does" and whatever other tangential packages happen to be installed on the build system.
Try building an RPM for CentOS 6 on a RockyLinux 8 system, or building for both of those on Fedora.
You can do it, but it's real ball ache, and you have to jump through a lot of hoops.
Compare to building a deb for any version of Debian/Ubuntu on Fedora/RHEL it's a doddle and predictable.
Debian, as its so MANUAL. Upgrading by manually updating x times and then literally changing the repos manually in the sources list? Wtf? Without any documentation or automation??
QubesOS, as it probably doesnt run on any real hardware. Didnt get beyond a blackscreen, and also AMD consumer GPUs dont support accelerated VMs making it useless.
Ubuntu because its annoying, but unsnap fixes a lot and its actually okay, still outdated Kernel als a bit weird.
KDE Neon because I cant tolerate its not a workstation distro but want it to be one
Linux Mint. Its old, and always had weird crashes for me. Its kinda nice and easy, kinda weird and complicated to do certain things. Some packages dont run as its not Ubuntu. Would always choose any KDE Distro that is newer.
Ubuntu: it's not bad, I just don't like canonical
Manjaro: it starts as arch but more user friendly (by being preconfigured), until it inevitably breaks (being arch) and you end up with a regular arch that you don't know how is configured
Elementary os: it's too elementary os
All those con distros that are just a bunch of reskinned free stuff ask you money for that. Like zorin os
Having used both Manjaro and Arch, Manjaro breaking has nothing to do with Arch. Arch is far more stable.