what linux distro do you use and/or like?

[IdOp]

Wow, it's been almost 9 years since I first replied to this thread ... time flies. I'm still using Slackware. My main machines use 14.0. I've experimented with 14.1 and even made a live CD out of it. I put 14.2 on my laptop when changing it to a SSD.

[Head_on_a_Stick]

I have voted Debian because that's what my family use but I have an Arch Linux system that I use for games, a task it performs admirably.

I use my OpenBSD ThinkPad X201 for anything serious though

[bassocksky]

My only Linux distro I use at home is Manjaro/Arch. Main usage: running my outliners and closed source textmaker office program. All the other things are done with my OpenBSD workstation/laptops.

At work our main servers (pysical and virtual) are running Debian / FreeBSD / OpenBSD.

Debian --> systemd --> pain in the ass.

Aside this,
I'm a lucky guy...

Regards
Andre

[GarryR]

I still use Debian 7, but not much, and when support for that runs out, maybe even sooner,
Linux will no longer be a part of my system.

I am happy with OpenBsd, have not tried any of the other BSD's since Open Bsd works fine for me.
Nothing against Linux, but I am much more comfortable with OpenBsd.

I probably will still have the current Debian stable on a VM, and the testing version on another.

My wife, and my kids computers have the MX -16 on them.
----edited----
I didn't see the poll at first, but still am not voting for any, in the not to distant future , all
the computers in our family will be OpenBsd, or another BSD

[BSD-user]

All GNU-*Linux are stable in the same sense more-or-less. I can never fathom the term people throw around calling their distro stable. They are are all stable. In fact the most unstable aspect of a GNU/Linux distro is the kernel itself. Linux kernel is one huge pile of bugs. Over the years they've packed in so much (useless) stuff in it that so many things can and do go wrong. The LT release receives 100+ major revisions and the timetable isn't even halfway through. I personally no longer trust the Linux kernel for its stability. Just like it was the case with Windows all those years ago there's always an aura of fear hanging around the system that it may topple over any time. At this time they have three top release revisions and they are all fairly useless. To get anything remotely stable you have to go back to release 4.9 at the most.

[jkl]

2018: After several attempts to be happy with Slackware, I am surprisingly happy with Gentoo (non-GNU Linux, by the way) now.

[bsd-keith]

I've been using AntiX (Debian based/no systemd) for years now, (before that, I was a Debian user), the kernel has got quite big in that time, but I see they are going to be stripping out unused bits of it soon, if not already done.

I've not had any trouble with it that wasn't of my own making, it gets as fully tested as it can be before release, which is more than can be said for some of the major distros.

As an aside, I had my first bit of trouble with OBSD the other day, my laptop kept going around in circles trying to boot(!?). But it's quite an old one, so I put it down to the laptop, as I've never had any problems with OBSD that weren't of my own making either.

[e1-531g]

Originally Posted by BSD-user

All GNU-*Linux are stable in the same sense more-or-less. I can never fathom the term people throw around calling their distro stable

What is definition of stable? Does robust update and upgrade procedure count? In that case IMHO some distributions are clearly more stable than another.

[cynwulf]

Stable should refer to the API and/or ABI.

It has been misappropriated by Linux users as a synonym for "stuff doesn't break/crash".

[BSD-user]

Originally Posted by cynwulf

Stable should refer to the API and/or ABI.

It has been misappropriated by Linux users as a synonym for "stuff doesn't break/crash".

Good point. No wonder we keep seeing new functionality and new bugs being added to the Linux kernel well after a release is supposed to have matured.

[Prevet]

I started using Devuan on an old Intel laptop from 2004 or 2005, but don't feel in full control or safe using it. So today is the day I will finally move this laptop over to OpenBSD. I have a modern powerful machine with Intel, OpenBSD and Windows 7 on it, but I don't trust Intel any more so it sits off line.

[LeFrettchen]

I use Linux on my Raspberry Pi cause I cannot install OpenBSD...
Triple boot :

• Raspbian for the net & office works,
• LibreELEC for the medias,
• RetroPie for fun

[Funkygoby]

Debian.
From Etch (~2007) to Wheezy (~2017) it has been my trustworthy OS after years of Windows debacle.
With Wheezy end-of-life looming, I have "OS-hoped" between Debian and FreeBSD/OpenBSD and settled on the later 1 year ago.

Nowadays, I keep Debian stretch/stable on a spare laptop for android development. I seldom use it though.

For everything else, OpenBSD is my main OS.

[Sensucht94]

I've used Linux for 2-3 years between late 2015- early 2018, costantly changing distro while seeking out for one capable of suiting my needs and taste. I've found few (namely Slackware, CRUX, Void Linux and Alpine) which I like a lot, especially Slackware. However, I've come to the conclusion that unless I were coping with ultramodern hardware (which I don't own), I just don't need Linux.

BSDs and Illumos look to more solid, professional, polished, stable, lightweight, simple, well designed and egineered systems than Linux, while their documentation is better organized and accessible and the community more mature, competent, friendly and fun. BSDs and Illumos make me want to contribute, study how thevsystem works in-depth, while Linux does not

I mean, to each one his own, Linux is just not the best for me, at least for the moment.
If I really had to choose an alternstive OS, I'd go with macOS

[cynwulf]

Originally Posted by Sensucht94

BSDs and Illumos look to more solid, professional, polished, stable, lightweight, simple, well designed and egineered systems than Linux, while their documentation is better organized and accessible and the community more mature, competent, friendly and fun. BSDs and Illumos make me want to contribute, study how thevsystem works in-depth, while Linux does not

I mean, to each one his own, Linux is just not the best for me, at least for the moment.

+1 on all points

Linux has become a mess, strewn with complicated "black box" solutions such as systemd and lots of needless wheel reinvention. There are simply too many corporate fingers in the Linux pie these days and no clear direction or leadership.

[IdOp]

Originally Posted by Sensucht94

However, I've come to the conclusion that unless I were coping with ultramodern hardware (which I don't own), I just don't need Linux.

I have mostly "ultra-old hardware" and find I need Linux for that too. Just sayin'.

[Sensucht94]

Originally Posted by cynwulf

+1 on all points

Linux has become a mess, strewn with complicated "black box" solutions such as systemd and lots of needless wheel reinvention. There are simply too many corporate fingers in the Linux pie these days and no clear direction or leadership.

And I definitely agree with you on this. Linux Foundation is more about business now than quality of software. It's trade correctness for convenience. Under some circumstances, not so different from Oracle or Microsoft and not something I feel the urge to be part of

Originally Posted by IdOp

I have mostly "ultra-old hardware" and find I need Linux for that too. Just sayin'.

It's likely I've just been lucky, but here's my testimony:

I've never bought Thinkpads, Dell laptops or other typical hardware to run BSDs and Solaris, most stuff I own is old and second-handed,but's always happened to be supoorted and work flawlessly so far.

I started by moving my old 2000 desktop PC from WindowsMe to OpenSolaris in 2008, and it was fully supported. Now it runs Tribblix OS

My first laptop is a cheap Acer TravelMate gifted by the trade union to my father in 2008; it runs NetBSD flawlessly, but has also run FreeBSD and DragonflyBSD for a while

My second laptop is an intermediate-quality Samsung from 2010. I started using it only on 2015 though and it runs OpenIndiana.

My current desktop is a relatively powerful and modern machine I built in early 2017, and it was first though as a Slackware/Steam gaming platform and a multimedia workstation. Later on,dince I was not playing games much, I decided to put FreeBSD in it, and it turned out being perfectly supported (including dedicated soubd card, nvidia graphics, internal wireless, bluetooth).

My Rpi3 runs NetBSD without problem

This is not meant to assess you're lying,but that your experience with very old hardware being unsupported should rather be regarded as an exception

[IdOp]

Originally Posted by Sensucht94

It's likely I've just been lucky, but here's my testimony:

...

This is not meant to assess you're lying,but that your experience with very old hardware being unsupported should rather be regarded as an exception

Thanks for your examples, and I definitely didn't take them the wrong way! I'm glad you've had good luck, and maybe I've had bad luck as you say.

Much of my hardware is discarded by other people. Usually Linux will work on it. I don't mean to say Linux is better in ways that it's not. Here are a few of my examples:

* Intel i915 broken on NetBSD, GPU crashes and slows down.

* radeondrm for ATI Radeon RV280 9200 broken on NetBSD. X comes up black.

* a couple of old ATAPI DVD's spew errors under NetBSD and OpenBSD.

* HP g60 laptop won't boot install kernel under NetBSD and OpenBSD.

Both of us are of course offering anecdotes of our own random experiences, it's hard to draw general conclusions from such a limited sample.

[Sensucht94]

Originally Posted by IdOp

Much of my hardware is discarded by other people. Usually Linux will work on it. I don't mean to say Linux is better in ways that it's not. Here are a few of my examples:

* Intel i915 broken on NetBSD, GPU crashes and slows down.

* radeondrm for ATI Radeon RV280 9200 broken on NetBSD. X comes up black.

* a couple of old ATAPI DVD's spew errors under NetBSD and OpenBSD.

* HP g60 laptop won't boot install kernel under NetBSD and OpenBSD.

Thank you too for having taken the time to write this Wow, that's disheartening, be it luck or not, it must have felt frustrating

Both of us are of course offering anecdotes of our own random experiences, it's hard to draw general conclusions from such a limited sample.

Sure, perhaps a survey on the entire userbase attending BSD fora, mailing lists and IRC might make any sense but that way they just remain practically insignificant case reports

Maybe you could have tried FreeBSD and Illumos too,but clearly, if you don't use/like them they make no sense or advantage against Linux

[IdOp]

Originally Posted by Sensucht94

Thank you too for having taken the time to write this Wow, that's disheartening, be it luck or not, it must have felt frustrating

Thanks, I'd say for me it was not disheartening. When something like that happens, it's a little surprising (after all, most things do work well), and sometimes a bit frustrating. But I also tend to try installing all 3 OS's every time I get a new piece of old hardware, just to see how things work. If there is a problem, it will affect what I do with that machine, but life goes on. Overall, I like NetBSD and OpenBSD in many ways, and am persistent. For example, the i915 problem is on my main desktop; so the X graphics slows down and moving a window becomes "shaggy". It's not that critical and I kept using NetBSD despite that. In the last half year or so I had to stop using NetBSD due to other factors (some of which were due to me), but now those seem to be resolved. So I will need to start again from point zero, sort out what to do and take time to do it.

Sure, perhaps a survey on the entire userbase attending BSD fora, mailing lists and IRC might make any sense but that way they just remain practically insignificant case reports

In principle a lot of individual anecdotes could hold significant data. But there are so many factors to sort out. To mention a few ... more users implies more problem reports; problems get reported more than success; inexperienced users may report problems that really aren't. Maybe google should data-mine this stuff, but not me.

Maybe you could have tried FreeBSD and Illumos too,but clearly, if you don't use/like them they make no sense or advantage against Linux

I have never tried Illumos and am curious about that side of things. I think it would probably be a big learning curve, so at the moment it will have to wait, but it is in the back of my mind anyway.