Looking to switch distros
Looking to switch distros
Hi, sorry if this isn't the right place for this question. I've been using Linux Mint Cinnamon for about 9 months now and have also been experimenting with an Ubuntu GNOME Wayland session for the past month or so. I don't really like distro-hopping, but using X11 isn't cutting it for me. After giving GNOME an honest shot, I don't think it's for me. However, Wayland has been stellar. I would prefer to keep using LM Cinnamon, but I have a dual monitor setup that use different refresh rates which has been causing issues.
I'm interested in Arch, but I'm slightly concerned about the frequent comments regarding things breaking during updates. Also, is maintaining an Arch install heavy on time consumption? I'm not opposed to reading the wiki and spending time here and there to keep things working. However, I'm a bit hesitant if I were to run into an issue that may be more complicated than I may be prepared for. That said, generally I do like the higher skill ceiling options, if that makes sense in this context.
Tumbleweed seems more beginner friendly from what I've read so far. While I do generally enjoy challenges, having a smoother day-to-day experience does certainly have it's own appeal.
I would primarily be doing some gaming (this would be a mix of more recent AAA titles along with less demanding ones) and programming, along with the usual stuff you'd expect on a desktop setup. I have a Ryzen 5 3600 processor, an AMD 6650 XT GPU, and 16 gb RAM if that information helps. Thanks in advance; if this isn't the right place, I'll delete the post.
Update: I have installed EndeavourOS and things have been smooth so far. The installer was very straightforward, and setup was extremely quick. I have started reinstalling various programs which were part of my original workflow with very minimal issues. The issues primarily came from adjusting to pacman syntax. I also have a series of notes regarding what I have installed and how. Cheers, and thanks for your input, everyone. I will be sticking with Gnome for the time being.
You're viewing a single thread.
Thanks OP for being relatively descriptive!
Your issues with
xfce-notifyddon't make a lot of sense. Therefore, I wouldn't dismiss the thought that you might have tarnished your GNOME Wayland session. If possible, consider reinstalling a distro with GNOME pre-installed. Perhaps consider Fedora this time as it's less opinionated compared to Ubuntu and thus offers GNOME (almost exactly) like how its developers intended.Don't be afraid to engage with GNOME's plethora of extensions. Sure, it's stupid that some basic functionality is only unofficially supported through extensions. But one simply can't deny how much they add to GNOME.
Currently, if Wayland is a requirement, then we're bound to GNOME, KDE Plasma (and COSMIC in the near future). Furthermore, there are a couple of window managers (of which Sway and Hyprland are the big ones) that are properly supported in Wayland. If, for whatever reason, GNOME is not it, then move on to explore the next. Rinse and repeat.
Regarding Arch; Arch is mostly an exercise in how good your system administration skills are. Btw, don't feel intimidated by this as the skills required are linearly correlated with the complexity of the system. E.g. a clean install with EndeavourOS that relies mostly on container-solutions for its packages and is set with (GRUB-)Btrfs+Timeshift/Snapper -comes pre-configured on Garuda Linux- should be a rock solid and easy to maintain system compared to one that relies on repos with 'frozen' packages but still chooses to install plenty through the AUR natively. (Btw, the second system I just described is bound to break and is not only very 'complex', but the combination of 'frozen' packages + over reliance on installing AUR packages natively is just a very bad practice. Note that on their own either 'frozen' packages or over reliance on installing AUR natively ain't that bad or complex, the combination -however- is astronomically bad and 'complex'.)
Question: Is there any reason why you seem to gravitate towards rolling release distros? 'Skill-ceiling' is (surprisingly enough) grossly the same on Linux Mint and Arch, it's the 'skill-floor' in which there's a (significant) discrepancy between the two. Distros with actually high skill ceilings would be the likes of Gentoo and NixOS.
Gaming and programming should be fine regardless of which distro you decide to stick to.
Your issues with
xfce-notifyddon’t make a lot of sense. Therefore, I wouldn’t dismiss the thought that you might have tarnished your GNOME Wayland session.Yeah, based on another reply in this thread, I seem to have botched things. I've already started ensuring I have the proper backups in place for reformatting my boot drive.
Perhaps consider Fedora this time
I certainly will. Thanks for the recommendation. This distro seemed to be the one most often recommended while I was looking around just now. I will also be looking into extensions as well.
Sway and Hyprland
Window managers have piqued my interest in the past. Currently, I think I'll focus on GNOME, but I agree with looking into these one at a time if GNOME ends up not suiting my needs.
the skills required are linearly correlated with the complexity of the system
That's good to know, I really agree with Arch's philosophy of focusing on simplicity. I don't have much experience with containers, tbh. However, I'm not opposed to learning about them. That said, I have done a little bit of reading regarding them in the past, and why they might be useful.
Question: Is there any reason why you seem to gravitate towards rolling release distros?
WRT Arch: it grabbed my interest because having the option for the most current updates sounded appealing. It may not be necessary, but if the situation arises and it would help, I'd like to have it. The Arch wiki has also been a big incentive, as well as the AUR. If I'm not mistaken, Arch is also a distro that allows me to pick and choose aspects of my operating system with intention as opposed to having a system that comes with stuff that I don't use or need.
WRT TW: As Arch grabbed my interest initially, I was worried about whether it may cause too many issues down the line. So, I read that BTRFS was useful for snapshotting and preventing accidents, while still enjoying the benefits of a rolling release distro. I suppose it comes down to having the option to choose from more current software updates, while having the security of native BTRFS support and snapshots. I was also looking at TW because it was a distro that supported KDE, but I'm learning from this thread that KDE is not ideal if I'm looking for a Wayland session.
‘Skill-ceiling’ is (surprisingly enough) grossly the same on Linux Mint and Arch, it’s the ‘skill-floor’ in which there’s a (significant) discrepancy between the two.
Whoops, lol. I'll chalk this up to being tired.
WRT Arch: it grabbed my interest because having the option for the most current updates sounded appealing. It may not be necessary, but if the situation arises and it would help, I’d like to have it.
Fair. This is a legitimately good reason.
The Arch wiki has also been a big incentive
Friendly reminder that the contents of the excellent ArchWiki translate surprisingly well to other distros.
as well as the AUR
Which you're free to benefit from regardless of which distro you end up installing as long as an Arch container offered through e.g. Distrobox is setup on your system. Not all packages are supported like this, as custom kernels offered through the AUR have to be installed natively and thus require to be installed on Arch(-based distros). But most of your needs from the AUR (or literally any repo/package from any of the supported containers distros) should be satisfied regardless.
If I’m not mistaken, Arch is also a distro that allows me to pick and choose aspects of my operating system with intention as opposed to having a system that comes with stuff that I don’t use or need.
Correct. Though, while Arch defaults to a blank slate. Other distros like Debian, Fedora and openSUSE (to name a few) do offer similar functionality on specific ISOs (or just as an option in the YaST installer for openSUSE).
I was also looking at TW because it was a distro that supported KDE, but I’m learning from this thread that KDE is not ideal if I’m looking for a Wayland session.
That's perhaps a bit too harsh on KDE Plasma without giving it an honest shot first. Don't let others' opinion on the matter deter your willingness to genuinely explore, experience and judge for yourself 😉. Furthermore, it's important to note that the development of Wayland has accelerated (relatively) recently. Therefore, the issues of others might have already been resolved since.
Which you’re free to benefit from regardless of which distro you end up installing as long as an Arch container offered[...]
Other distros like Debian, Fedora and openSUSE (to name a few) do offer similar functionality on specific ISOs (or just as an option in the YaST installer for openSUSE).
This information is definitely useful for me to keep in mind, thank you.
That’s perhaps a bit too harsh on KDE Plasma without giving it an honest shot first. Don’t let others’ opinion on the matter deter your willingness to genuinely explore, experience and judge for yourself 😉. Furthermore, it’s important to note that the development of Wayland has accelerated (relatively) recently. Therefore, the issues of others might have already been resolved since.
Valid reminder. I'll keep an open mind, and try things out for myself. Cheers.