I'm currently switching from being a web-dev to be a sys-admin. I'm trying to learn how to do things properly and was wondering how to choose the best distro "for the job". We are a small, 3 man (including 1 person from accounting) company. I always used Ubuntu on servers but my boss prefers Debian and some others say that they use Rocky. I'm currently in the process introducing Docker to my boss and he wants a (in my opinion) complicated/overkill setup with PXE boot, minimal distro (something like flatcar/alpine as the host), one external storage per container and other stuff to harden the system. I think a Ubuntu/Debian VM with Docker installed is completely fine for the time. What would be the right way to handle a small docker setup that might scale? Go all the way or use something simple?

Looking for **WRITTABLE** resque/recovery type LINUX distro for USB flash drive under 8GB installed. Current primary usage scenario: write and troubleshoot initramfs script for non-standard boot process (details doesn't really matter here). By "resque type" I mean without heavy stuff like office/video/multimedia, not necessary loaded with all kinds of recovery tools. Should support/have: - minor **soft installation** and fstab, other /etc files modification (i.e. ROOTFS need to be WRITTABLE, or /etc at least) - mount of LUKS + BTRFS partitions & subvolumes - able to run Bash scripts - have (or be able to install) plain text editor (will be used for shell scripts editing) - Terminal - Chroot (or be able to install) I tried Systemresque 10.02, which has touchpad DISABLED (there's a ticket on gitlab for 3 years about this). One cannot even install any of recent versions 11.x with their own USBWriter, and has other issues noticable almost immediately. Otherwise Systemresque would fit the target. Haven't given up on Systemresque completely yet though. Most of the time I spend in dual panel file manager or in terminal, therefore GUI isn't important. Interface similar to Cinnamon or Windows 7 would be best if there's a choice, but again not important. This is a laptop with 1 disk, therefore installing full size distro to another disk is not an option. Thank you.

I saw a similar post about Solaris and thought of a similar howto.  I've heard of recent news (as in 2013) with the distribution and I learned I could easily update my initial *OpenIndiana* 151a7 release to **hipster** (0.5.11-0.151.1.8.1 to be more precise – you can check individual files in the distribution with the link).  In this upcoming release, many things are different from what is explained in the old OpenIndiana wiki or the [illumos](https://illumos.org) build howto and its "how to use gcc only" section because of the ownership of SunStudio, etc.  I've learned a long time ago that setting up an environment for development, or simply to compile a few things like I do, involves more than just having the right software.  It's a lot about configuration and information – and development skills when you do develop software. ### Software ### OpenIndiana uses IPS just like Solaris. pkg install pkgname / pkg search -r keyword and pkg info -r keyword are quite helpful as the GUI frontend packager is broken for the moment in 151a8. Extra repositories need to be configured to access extra packages: $ pkg set-publisher -p http://pkg.openindiana.org/sfe and the encumbered one if applicable pkg set-publisher -p http://pkg.openindiana.org/sfe-encumbered On a clean install, I've settled for these 2 big metapackages (about 600 mb of downloads total, some few GBs installed) and a few things which appeared appropriate when I compiled *fvwm*: sudo pkg install pkg://openindiana.org/metapackages/build-essential@1.0,5.11-0.151.1.8.1:20130803T052718Z sudo pkg install sunstudio12u1 sudo pkg install pkg:/library/desktop/gtk1@1.2.10-0.151.1.8 sudo pkg install pkg:/library/java/java-gnome@2.30.0-0.151.1.8 sudo pkg install pkg://sfe/library/fribidi@0.19.2,5.11-0.151.1.5:20120805T091919Z *Build-essential* contains mostly everything you need including but not limited to: pkg install -v pkg:/archiver/gnu-tar pkg:/compress/p7zip pkg:/compress/unzip \ pkg:/developer/build/ant pkg:/developer/build/autoconf pkg:/developer/build/automake-110 \ pkg:/developer/build/gnu-make pkg:/developer/build/libtool pkg:/developer/build/make \ pkg:/developer/gnome/gettext pkg:/developer/java/jdk \ pkg:/developer/java/junit pkg:/developer/lexer/flex pkg:/developer/macro/cpp \ pkg:/developer/macro/gnu-m4 pkg:/developer/object-file pkg:/developer/parser/bison \ pkg:/file/gnu-coreutils pkg:/file/gnu-findutils \ pkg:/library/libtool/libltdl pkg:/library/libxslt pkg:/library/pcre \ pkg:/system/library/math/header-math pkg:/text/gawk \ pkg:/text/gnu-diffutils pkg:/text/gnu-gettext pkg:/text/gnu-grep \ pkg:/text/gnu-patch pkg:/text/gnu-sed pkg:/text/groff \ pkg:/text/texinfo pkg:/library/neon pkg:/library/apr-util-13 \ pkg:/developer/library/lint pkg:/system/header pkg:/developer/build/onbld \ pkg:/data/docbook \ pkg:/library/glib2 \ pkg:/library/libxml2 \ pkg:/library/libxslt \ pkg:/library/nspr/header-nspr \ pkg:/library/perl-5/xml-parser \ pkg:/system/library/install \ pkg:/system/library/dbus \ pkg:/system/library/libdbus \ pkg:/system/library/libdbus-glib \ pkg:/library/python-2/python-extra-26 \ pkg:/system/library/mozilla-nss/header-nss gcc 4.7.3 is the latest available in the *hipster* branch (pkg://openindiana.org/developer/gcc-47@4.7.3,5.11-0.151.1.8.1:20130802T223703Z). There are also the *gcc-dev* and *ss-dev* metapackages, but I'm not sure to what extent they'd add anything to what I have now. ### Configuration (highlights from my .bashrc file) ### In some cases there might be a need to use another version of GCC than 4.7 but for now I'm using the latest available and have been relying on some suggested configuration from both the *OpenIndiana* and *Illumos* site, doing the best I could: [...] CW_GCC_DIR="/usr/gcc/4.7/bin/"; export CW_GCC_DIR GCC_ROOT="/usr/gcc/4.7"; export GCC_ROOT ONBLD_TOOLS="/opt/onbld"; export ONBLD_TOOLS ONLY_LINT_DEFS="-I/sunstudio12.1/prod/include/lint"; export ONLY_LINT_DEFS __GNUC=""; export __GNUC amd64_LINT="/opt/sunstudio12.1/bin/lint"; export amd64_LINT i386_LINT="/opt/sunstudio12.1/bin/lint"; export i386_LINT PATH="/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/opt/SUNWspro/bin:/usr/ccs/bin:/opt/onbld/bin:/opt/onbld/bin/i386:/opt/sfw/bin:/usr/sfw/bin:/usr/dt/bin:/usr/openwin/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/gnu/bin/:/usr/sbin/:/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/ccs/bin:/usr/dt/bin:/usr/gnu/bin/"; export PATH ### The challenge(s) ### The challenge may be great, even for a developer, which I am not. After configuring my environment, I try to compile fvwm 2.6.5 because it's something standard, it's small and is sort of a landmark piece of software I'm interested in... to see what gives. Trying to improve on the features afforded by the configuration, I thought I had an issue and had to compile glib from source. So I came across this amazing account from this obviously very knowledgeable person who actually compiled this on OI. I realized I didn't need to install any further glib package, but this person maintains a repository of ported compiled software and that can be quite useful considering some of the complexity... Also, as a general rule, one should pay attention to bug tracking on the platform as well as the mailing lists (especially oi-dev). ### Common Build Environment ### In the old section of the wiki on building the OI OS proper, there's reference to this tool called CBE 1.7.0. It cannot be installed at this point because it requires SUNWperl510core and force installing this will ruin your acl in my experience. When I succeeded in installing it, I'll admit to having no clue whatsoever on how to use that as it's way over my head and I wish I knew if this can simplify something when compiling userland stuff. What I know is that in the latest releases you have a mini-version of it 1.8.0 (pkg://openindiana.org/developer/build/cbe@1.8.0,5.11-0.151.1.8:20130305T143840Z) so I installed that which doesn't require the old perl dependency. Still nowhere near grasping what it's about (I'll have to read about *specs* and such) but it's there. I see some 2013 dated thread in the mailing list in the context of contributing SFE packages and pkgbuild . ---------- ### Questions ### - I was able to build fvwm 2.6.5 easily, but does my setup look like a minimally acceptable build environment and is there anything specific that doesn't comply with best practices here? ---------- ### References and links ### Basic admin commands cheat sheet for someone new to SunOS (PDF)

I want to use Debian 6, and I don't want to use Stable.  I want to use Testing or Sid, but I don't know which one is better for me. Is Sid really unstable?  Is Testing up-to-date like Arch?  Or is it like a non-rolling release distro?

Which distro should I install on my 8GB pendrive? I need it to have powerfull repos (everything, music editing is crushial) and should be lightweighting not losing on functionality. Any propositions? PS: I'm now on windows. EDIT: I'd like to use XFCE and light-weighting should be priority. I mean I'd like to choose all packages from scratch.

I am looking for a lightweight Linux distribution for development purposes on older hardware and considering GNU Guix (yes, I like lisp, functional programming, and reproducibility :D). My requirements are a system that is resource-efficient both in terms of memory and CPU usage. I'm planning to use EXWM (Emacs Window Manager) as my desktop environment, and here is my emacs config file , which is relatively modest. Could someone with experience in using GNU Guix, especially with EXWM, provide insights into its resource usage compared to other lightweight distributions like Puppy Linux, AntiX, Q4OS, Linux Lite, Mabox Linux, and Arch Linux? I am interested in metrics such as average RAM usage after boot, CPU load during typical development tasks, and responsiveness of the system. Any comparative insights or pointing towards benchmarks would be greatly appreciated.

I have a need for an extremely locked down desktop environment that would have three profiles 1. School - Can only run Libreoffice and Firefox. When I say ONLY I mean ONLY - can't change any setting at all, not even the desktop wallpaper. The ability to not even see settings would be ideal as well. This would be kind of like a kiosk profile where the desktop has shortcuts to run the two programs and that's it. 2. Games - Similar to School profile in that no settings can be changed but I could somehow put apps on the desktop a needed (i.e. - Minecraft) 3. Administrator/root - Can do anything, normal desktop experience I looked around at kiosk desktop experiences but they seem to just limit a user to only one application, not the ability to switch between two or more. Additionally I looked at kids distro's but they are seemingly just a streamlined desktop experience (no menus - which I like), but you still have the ability to edit user settings and whatnot. Is there even a distro like this or something that could be customized to do this without a ton of work? I know what I'm asking for is not normal

I am looking to build a desktop with servers. Debian, Ubuntu redhat.... I want to avoid snaps if possible.

(This is not a "which distribution is better" question!) GNU GUIX and NixOS are two Linux distributions based on the NixOS package manager. I realize that GUIX seems to use Guile for defining packages/dependencies or other meta-data uses; and I'm guess everything in GUIX is GPL'ed, while perhaps not everything in NixOS is... but those seem more like superficial differences. What I'm hoping to understand is whether these two distributions have _architectural_ differences of any significance.

swap ubuntu in my system to garuda linux without using usb or cd or any kind of external storage device I've heard its possible by changing the contents of sources.list file, but i think its only possible when im swapping from [**debian** based distro] to [another **debian** based distro] but here its [**debian** based distro] to [**arch** based distro] soo, is it possible¿ or, is there another ways to swap distribution?

I have a controller that offers GUI/Cockpit View over HTTP as a single-page application (SPA). My project is now to have a Cockpit computer that displays this "website" (SPA) and nothing more. **I need a Linux which boots super fast, the ideal would be 10-15 seconds, into Chromium.** ... because nobody wants to wait half a minute to see engine data (like the HUD display in modern cars). There need to be nothing more on this Linux system except - Xorg with Intel drivers - Chromium Runs on Intel Atom x5-Z8350 x64. EFI takes 1 second. --- I already tried a bare Debian, but I could only strip it down to 24 seconds (power-on to page loaded) Can someone point me in the right direction? Is there maybe a distribution that fits my use case exactly? I don't know the search terms for such a thing. Systemd-analyze plot: I've made a video of the boot process. The system is booted as soon as the test site shows yellow "three.js" text. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_XqE-hTYcg

I have an installation of an RPM-based distro (like Fedora), which uses one set of RPM repositories for its packages, and I'd like to change it to instead use a different set of RPM repositories, effectively transforming it into another distro (like CentOS). I would need to do this without reinstalling the system wholesale. The reason I'd like to do this is because this machine has been given to me by my organization, and we were told "not to install any other OS" on it. However, it's using an obscure set of repos, which seem to be rather slow to pick up security updates, and I can't really trust that repo to be properly maintained. I do have root access on the machine, and according to the IT department this would not count as "reinstalling". However, this repo has packages for which the version name has a vendor suffix (like, for example, a package from Ubuntu having a version of 1:13.0.1-2ubuntu2). In particular, certain system packages like systemd have that. AFAICT, this means that everything that depends on systemd, as well as systemd itself, will have to be reinstalled, and so most of the system will be deleted and then reinstalled while the system is running, which seems like a very quick way to break my installation. One possible solution I've considered is: starting from the leaves of the dependency tree of my installation, - download the corresponding package from the new repo - edit it so that its dependency versions match the old repo's - install this package over the existing one - if this package was depended on by any other packages, replace those with their unedited version (because this package now has the new name, and the edited packages were depending on the old name) - sequentially do this for every depth of the dependency tree Would this strategy work, and what other options do I have to perform such an upgrade?

And if yes, how good* are they? I like to use Tiling Window Managers but I do not like to configure everything from scratch. I already use Manjaro-i3 and it is pretty nice. Right now I am interested in using DWM and Emacs XWM (EXWM). Edit: *: In my case for the term 'good' you can think of criteria like stability, up-to-date'ness, amount of people supporting it (like a large userbase or funding by industry) and avoidance of bloat while still having all basic tools to be used as a regular laptop main OS.

Recently I came across many Linux distributions. Before that I've been always using OpenSUSE so some things apparently were quite obvious to me - for example that it's possible and quite easy to set up full disk encryption or arbitrary, custom mount options on installer level. However it seems that actually such option is really exotic and apart from Arch Linux (where it's hard to call it "supported by installer"), probably Gentoo and OpenSUSE I couldn't find any distribution that allows you to encrypt whole disk (including /boot). Just to avoid confusion - I'm talking about setup where first stage of GRUB asks for password before even showing GRUB menu to unlock initrd, then initrd asks for the same password again to load kernel and other stuff. In OpenSUSE installer it's performed automatically in case /boot is placed on encrypted LVM. However Debian, RedHat, CentOS, Ubuntu, Mint and probably all distros using similar installers claim it's incorrect configuration and refuse to install OS. Are there any other non-specialized (means those strictly privacy oriented distributions like Tails or Whonix don't really count) distributions apart from mentioned 3 that support such installation scheme? > >EDIT: In response to @henriquehbr to be 100% clear on what do I mean by **full disk** encryption: > >There's no separate /boot partition. System asks for password twice: In GRUB: >And after GRUB: > In the end there's only 1 partition which is encrypted LVM: > **However** > What is referred to as "encrypted LVM" in all other installers I know: > Is configuration with separate /boot partition. >Trying to remove /boot partition results in following errors on Debian and Ubuntu: Sorry for a lot of pictures but I wanted to make it 100% clear.

I'm a Mac user and I **want to try different Linux distros** (just anything that is not made by huge corporations). I'm coming from **Linux Mint Cinnamon 20.3** and am now on **Fedora 36**. Because the UI structure seems more familiar with macOS (yes, Apple fan but not that kind of them) Is there anything else you would recommend me? Trying just for the sake of it and to maybe get into some coding. It is **not likely that I will daily drive it** but rather would use it occasionally for some experimenting. The specs for my *experimenting-laptop* are: **Sony Vaio SVE1712C1EW** Intel Pentium B980 Intel Graphics 2000 4GiB of RAM Recommendations would be very nice (something that doesn't blow my Laptop) :))

We are fairly new to Linux. We are looking for Suitable Linux based Operating System (distribution) for python, Maxima (computer algebra system), c programming and jupyter notebook. We want to install these on 30 computer systems. Which Linux based Operating System would be useful? Is there any distribution which comes pre-installed with one or more of these? We will prefer to have some good GUI as users are not acquainted with Linux but familiar with Windows operating system. Ours is educational institute. Any help will be highly appreciated. Thanks.

For my PhD project, my supervisor has suggested to install this (old) mathematical software: http://www.gang.umass.edu/software/cmclab/index.html As you can see in the requirements, this software runs in Linux RedHat 7.1/7.2 i686. I've tried to set up a virtual machine with the 7.2 version and, after the installation, the OS starts in command mode, and won't switch to desktop mode (needed to use this software). I've digged a little bit and it seems that these old versions are not able to install drivers for the "modern" hardware (or even recognize it), and therefore this system can't start in the graphic mode because it has not clue how to use the screen... Right, so as far as I can see I have two options: 1. Try to (somehow) find and install in command mode the right drivers for my graphic card, and hope that this solves the issue. [I'd say very unlikely] 2. Try to install another distribution (maybe similar enough to enigma 7.2) in which this software can run. This looks like a decent idea, but I don't know which distribution I could pick. This is a software made by a mathematician with who I don't have contact, so I can't ask them if there is such an alternative. Could anyone, based on the very little information provided in the software web page, help me choosing the "right" distribution? Or maybe does someone have some hope in the first option?

I'm experiencing input lag on Ubuntu 20.04 with the R-Go Split Break Ergonomic Keyboard. An amazon reviewer points to the fact that this problem does not occur on all linux distributions. Is anyone using a linux distribution where this problem does not occur? R-Go support suggested using wayland. This did not help. urburburb comment at https://www.amazon.com/R-Go-Tools-Keyboard-RGOSP-USWIBL-Integrated/dp/B071GCDWN7

WSL allows the user to use any distribution of their choice, and Ubuntu is installed by default. I don't really understand the relevance of the distribution in the WSL context. My understanding is that Linux distribution refers to the skin of the OS. A UI layer on top of the OS core. But when using WSL you just use the command line, or perhaps run an independant single gui application. So what is the relevance of distribution in this context, and what difference does it make which distribution you choose?

If Linux distributions differ by the set of applications, then is it possible to convert one Linux distribution to another by simply copying the apps of that distribution to the target distribution? For example, if I will copy the apps of Ubuntu and paste it to Kali, would that make Kali become Ubuntu, or vice versa, etc., etc.?