SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
If you have gained some Linux skills after using Ubuntu for some time, you may try switching to these distributions to explore the world of Linux distributions further.
Ubuntu is one of the best Linux distributions for beginners. It's an excellent platform for people new to Linux. It is easy to install, has tons of free resources available along with a massive list of applications available for it. https://itsfoss.com/distribution-after-ubuntu/
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Discussion: Which Linux Distribution to Use After Ubuntu?
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 127 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
No self-made man ever did such a good job that some woman didn't
want to make some alterations.
-- Kim Hubbard
(Score: 1) by cocaine overdose on Saturday March 24 2018, @01:56PM (5 children)
Now, encouraging and assisting people to get into Linux? I was clear with my stance, don't. Building packages from source is Linux. Installing everything from binaries is not "lunix." LFS is necessary if you want to learn how the boot process works. It's not necessary if you define that by staying on the higher level "BIOS -> BOOT -> KERN." You CAN learn Lunix from BSD. That's how I got better at Lunix. There's virtually little difference between a BSD and a Lunix distro, besides the differences you get between distros. Boot up OpenBSD and tell me how it's different from Lunix.
If I wanted a de-bloated Firefox on Ubuntu, Debian, or Fedora, I'd have to re-learn how the systems setup their filesystem hierarchy. Then I'd have to track down build tools and dependencies. Dependencies will likely be where everything falls apart, because you can't just build/install the same dependencies across all three. There are usually a bunch of stupid conventions on libraries and headers, where across all three you would find things merged, moved, and malfunctioning. Take Apache. You would need to be very vigiliant on build flags, otherwise you'll run into linking and dep failures. Even then, I wouldn't do it on any of those, because they have things that I don't need. A lot of things that I don't need nor want.
Janrinok, get your head on straight, lad. Take a nap, because you're either half-awakingly misreading my entire post or the affiliate payouts are starting to ramp up. If the writer is looking for a long-term career... where? What is he doing? You can't drop that shit and start making a case on this general statement. If he's going into tech, but not a software dev, there is absolutely no reason to not use a Mac/Windows machine. None at all. If he's going to be a developer, then BSD is the way to go. If he's not in a technical role, he should get a phone. There is no reason to use a computer, when your job does not demand it. Your needs are not the average needs. If you want to say something, be specific and don't leave me with generalized drivel that goes on in circles. Use your words to explain why you think such and such. Without evidence, you're just doing the equivalent of shouting into the air "LUNIX #1! YOU CAN'T LEARN LUNIX FROM BSD!" which is absolutely false.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by janrinok on Saturday March 24 2018, @03:04PM (2 children)
How many of the world's supercomputers run on BSD?. How many of the servers keeping the web going today are BSD? How many IOT boards are running BSD. How many smart phones are running on BSD? Answer: very few. Linux is far more popular than BSD and I do not see any signs of that changing significantly, but apparently you do. I suspect that it is just wishful thinking.
and
The reason that I have problems understanding your arguments is you keep using the term 'Lunix'. You do know what Lunix [wikipedia.org] is, don't you? I think you mean to type Linux but you use the term so frequently I am not sure if it is intentional or not. So perhaps if you start using the correct terminology your arguments will make more sense. But to put your mind at rest, I do run both Linux and BSD so I know how similar or different they are from each other. But saying the best way of learning Linux is to install BSD is like saying the best way to learn how to drive a stick-shift car is to buy an automatic. Utter rubbish.
Which is why I have repeated several times in this thread that, if you want to help somebody learn more about Linux then you need to identify what exactly they want to learn rather than suggesting a random list of distros that one could install. This is why the original story is flawed and why it is here for discussion. But if somebody wants to learn how to build a de-bloated Firefox then yes, they will have to know the file hierarchy and how to use the build tools provided.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 24 2018, @11:42PM
Beserkley Standard Deviation - this thing gave birth to MacOS with the Nexxt bolt-on. Ruuuuunn!
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Monday March 26 2018, @07:47PM
Three reasons to use the term "Lunix" that I could come up with:
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by fyngyrz on Saturday March 24 2018, @03:24PM
I have Ubuntu installed on several servers. Why? Because it was supposed to be painless to install. And you know what? It was.
Once installed, however, I only SSL/shell into the servers, and do everything from the shell. Everything.
There's a lot to be said for starting from a working system, IMHO. I have work to do. Lots of it. I'd rather not spend my time doing things I don't actually need to do. It's not like I'm short of things to learn.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 24 2018, @03:33PM
No /proc, no /sys, good man pages, the base system isn't a hacked together collection, it is a designed set of tools with consistent functionality (and the file hierarchy actually makes sense and is adhered to), no kernel modules, etc.