I use Mint right now, what would be an good advanced distro for me?

you prefer debian and that is fine if you like slow moving patches and distros. The patches and updates do not change the learning curve at all so your claim does not hold here. never have I seen an update change how I write scripts, while I am sure it happens it is rare. Nothing you know really changes except maybe something obsoleted.
I'm not sure why you gave my last post an
google_angry-face_9620_mysmiley.net.png
( :angry: ) reaction? Anyway I think you maybe took my post the wrong way (Unless it's just my lack of understanding what emojies really mean but I based it on that and your subsequent post's tone).
Maybe my wording wasn't clear? I can be verbose at (most) times so if you misunderstood my post, sorry. But I do I suggest you re-read it because I wasn't criticizing anyone or anything.
Your signature reads:
Remember that linux is a community. As such we should stick together against commercialism and windows, even if we do not agree on which flavor of linux we can support each other.
So I'm sure when you re-read my post, you'll notice I wasn't trying to come off as critical. In fact I mainly praised Fedora. I just explained that there was a difference between Debian and Fedora, since saying "same thing can be said of Fedora..." without any context is misleading. I've already listed the differences so let's not rehash that.

On the subject of my "claim", I have to point out the strawman here: Where in my last post did I say patches or updates affect the learning curve? Answer: Nowhere.
I did make a valid point about new technologies impeding an everyday newcomer because they learn how to use something, then it changes.
Rapid release cycles kinda force that change on users while LTS gives them a chance to finish getting comfy and understand how the current technologies work so they can apply that understanding to experimenting with the new technologies (safely in a VM) while they wait until their LTS expires. That makes transition smooth and it means from there, they can start looking at whatever distros they like.

And when I referenced scripting, I meant changes in to distro in the next major release. Version X could have complete or partial makeover from Version Y. Think about the role of your wrapper scripts, all the gazillion of your launcher scripts, your post-install config scripts, your intermediary scripts, etc. that rely on certain software/commands, or even a "way of doing things". Changes happen between major versions/releses, and sometimes they mess up your customizations and break your scripts. But those are new releases which I referred to, not updates/patches which I did not refer to. And the thing I was pointing out was that LTS distros provide the comfort for you to slowly migrate while still receiving security patches and critical updates.

Anyway, I hope I cleared things up, despite all the exposition. TL;DR I wasn't bashing Fedora and I wasn't bashing you, I was pointing out factual differences between two distros to avoid confusion. I added an addendum just explaining why I made my recommendation. That's it. We don't have to agree, just don't take what I say out of context or misunderstand my intentions and see them as anything they're not. So, with all explained, I hope we're cool and can avoid threadjacking.
 


Redhat usually has 10 year LTS life cycles. ( You can add up to 3 additional years ).


  • RHEL 8 is based on Fedora 28
  • RHEL 9 is based on Fedora 34
  • RHEL 10 is based on Fedora 39
This is generally true for the Redhat clones as well. ( AmazonLinux, Rocky, Alma, Euro, Oracle, Scientific, etc... )
It is no longer true for CentOS, as now it is a streaming distro.

The US government, the US military, NASA, and the NSA use Redhat. Redhat has about 33% marketshare in datacenters.
More than all other Linux distro's combined.
(That data is about 5 years old)


Amazon Web Services announced that the next version of AWS Linux will be based on Fedora Linux.


Fedora is usually considered the "innovator" distro.
The first distro to use systemd, networkmananger, wayland, and pipewire for example.

Of the 10 largest cloud providers, only one of them is not Redhat/Fedora based. ( Azure )


Redhat (and clones) are the only RSA approved Linux distro's.

As a side note: Linux Torvalds uses Fedora, not Debian.

 
Last edited:
Very interesting stuff there @dos2unix

Redhat usually has 10 year LTS life cycles. ( You can add up to 3 additional years ).


  • RHEL 8 is based on Fedora 28
  • RHEL 9 is based on Fedora 34
  • RHEL 10 is based on Fedora 39
This is generally true for the Redhat clones as well. ( AmazonLinux, Rocky, Alma, Euro, Oracle, Scientific, etc... )
It is no longer true for CentOS, as now it is a streaming distro.
TBH I thought CentOS was more/less dead/discontinued. I heard something about a possible AWS move to Fedora-only (IIRC it was a mix of RHEL derivatives like CentOS and Fedora) but I don't really keep up with cloud news. I probably should given my job, but it's more just functional to me, kinda like pants.
So CentOS has a new life? I'd heard the name "Rocky Linux" but I had no idea where it came from or its base. And there are too many distros to keep up with, so when I hear a new name, I'm lucky if I remember to look it up later on.
And I know RHEL tends to be a lot like Debian with regards to LTS (and how up-to-date they stay). Debian's first few years LTS are free, but the Extended EOL, i.e. another 5 (or more) years is paid-for support via Freexian, so if you're paying for support, you may as well go with RHEL to begin with, lol.

The US government, the US military, NASA, and the NSA use Redhat. Redhat has about 33% marketshare in datacenters.
More than all other Linux distro's combined.
(That data is about 5 years old)
Yup, knew that. Redhat have a generally good history for security and lots of govts use Linux (heck North Korea developed a spyware Linux, IIRC -- I think China did too). So 5 years later, those stats are probably still true... well, except I think the MS may have lost around 5% of the market share, maybe even more, because they're basically alienating themselves with vendors and OEMs with all their certification BS and the cost of ownership for MS systems is higher than even subscription Linuxes. And with vendors/OEMs the MS issues, it trickles down the line to customers.
Slightly off-topic: In SA we have a small *nix base. For server Ubuntu actually seems to be the most popular but that's purely anecdotal based on the clients I've deal with. Nothing statistical. So far, in my year-and-three-months employment, I've come across 1 instance of BSD (an OpenBSD server) in the corporate sphere. I think in the next couple of years Linux is going to have a higher footprint.

Okay this took me by surprise. Not the Redhat part, but the SUSE being ahead of Canonical part. Honestly, I mean considering Canonical's marketing efforts and third-party collaborators (I'm sure we all remember when they put Amazon search on Ubuntu's desktop, lol). As I mentioned earlier, I live in SA so the markets will be different, and they seem to lean towards Ubuntu (well, mostly Ubuntu and MS hybrids for on prem -- not sure why aside from masochism) but the fact that I've encountered literally zero OpenSUSE/SEL servers to a gazillion Ubuntus and even an OpenBSD kinda gave me a mental graph without SUSE even on it. So that has my quite surprised.

Fedora is usually considered the "innovator" distro.
The first distro to use systemd, networkmananger, wayland, and pipewire for example.
Lol, I used the exact same wording I used in another "which distro" type thread where I called it an "innovator's OS". ;)

Of the 10 largest cloud providers, only one of them is not Redhat/Fedora based. ( Azure )

I thought Google's cloud stack was based on some ChromiumOS derivative...

Redhat (and clones) are the only RSA approved Linux distro's.
AFAIK, although it uses RPM, SUSE is not part of the RHEL ecosystem. Actually, years back I heard SUSE had some MS deal going -- I don't remember the story but apparently money changed hands for software support -- and I can't see RHEL or its family being involved with MS dealings.

As a side note: Linux Torvalds uses Fedora, not Debian.

Yep, he had trouble installing it years ago and never tried it since, I've seen that clip before, lol.
 
but the SUSE being ahead of Canonical part. Honestly, I mean considering Canonical's marketing efforts and third-party collaborators

I think that's somewhat true in the US. But in Europe, SuSE is everywhere.
 
I'm not sure why you gave my last post an
google_angry-face_9620_mysmiley.net.png
( :angry: ) reaction? Anyway I think you maybe took my post the wrong way (Unless it's just my lack of understanding what emojies really mean but I based it on that and your subsequent post's tone).
Maybe my wording wasn't clear? I can be verbose at (most) times so if you misunderstood my post, sorry. But I do I suggest you re-read it because I wasn't criticizing anyone or anything.
Your signature reads:

So I'm sure when you re-read my post, you'll notice I wasn't trying to come off as critical. In fact I mainly praised Fedora. I just explained that there was a difference between Debian and Fedora, since saying "same thing can be said of Fedora..." without any context is misleading. I've already listed the differences so let's not rehash that.

On the subject of my "claim", I have to point out the strawman here: Where in my last post did I say patches or updates affect the learning curve? Answer: Nowhere.
I did make a valid point about new technologies impeding an everyday newcomer because they learn how to use something, then it changes.
Rapid release cycles kinda force that change on users while LTS gives them a chance to finish getting comfy and understand how the current technologies work so they can apply that understanding to experimenting with the new technologies (safely in a VM) while they wait until their LTS expires. That makes transition smooth and it means from there, they can start looking at whatever distros they like.

And when I referenced scripting, I meant changes in to distro in the next major release. Version X could have complete or partial makeover from Version Y. Think about the role of your wrapper scripts, all the gazillion of your launcher scripts, your post-install config scripts, your intermediary scripts, etc. that rely on certain software/commands, or even a "way of doing things". Changes happen between major versions/releses, and sometimes they mess up your customizations and break your scripts. But those are new releases which I referred to, not updates/patches which I did not refer to. And the thing I was pointing out was that LTS distros provide the comfort for you to slowly migrate while still receiving security patches and critical updates.

Anyway, I hope I cleared things up, despite all the exposition. TL;DR I wasn't bashing Fedora and I wasn't bashing you, I was pointing out factual differences between two distros to avoid confusion. I added an addendum just explaining why I made my recommendation. That's it. We don't have to agree, just don't take what I say out of context or misunderstand my intentions and see them as anything they're not. So, with all explained, I hope we're cool and can avoid threadjacking.
sorry for the angry. I put it up after misreading your post. I fixed my post which matched the angry but forgot to remove the angry.
 
sorry for the angry. I put it up after misreading your post. I fixed my post which matched the angry but forgot to remove the angry.
No probs, it's all good. We're all on the same team.
 
I thought Google's cloud stack was based on some ChromiumOS derivative...
@Fanboi :-

You'd think so, wouldn't you? But, er, no.....

By all accounts, they have a weird hybrid thing going on. Part Gentoo, but partly some strange concoction they've cooked up all by themselves, called "Fuschia". They've been testing it in their offices for the last couple of years, but the last I heard it was in the beta testing phase in about three-quarters of their datacenters...

(Don't ask me what the remaining 25% are running on. Google just don't DO the standard, enterprise-support paradigm where a 3rd-party is responsible. With them, it's always been 'home-brewed' and completely 'in-house'....though I WILL say this; whatever that remaining 25% ARE using, you can guarantee it won't be what you'd expect.)


Mike. ;)
 
Last edited:
This may be a little off topic but I thought I'd post it.

That walking desk... No, Linus, no. He's given in to American marketing. People in Finland be like: Let's disown him. I don't get the treadmill-hybrid things. I've seen a rise in popularity with ones than have tablets things for watching movies and browsing social media. I just walk to the shops. Well I walk everywhere up to about 5-7km (3-4 miles). Saves money and I get exercise without a gym membership or expensive equipment. Come on Linus, burn the walker-desk, embrace the beautiful organised chaos corner desk! That said, Linus holding a sword at the end... That was redeeming. Actually that'd make a good figurine.

@Fanboi :-

(Don't ask me what the remaining 25% are running on. Google just don't DO the standard, enterprise-support paradigm where a 3rd-party is responsible. With them, it's always been 'home-brewed' and completely 'in-house'....though I WILL say this; whatever that remaining 25% ARE using, you can guarantee it won't be what you'd expect.)
...Big reveal: TempleOS
Google: You didn't see that coming!
 
It is no longer true for CentOS, as now it is a streaming distro.
CentOS isn't a RHEL clone anymore but still one 100% ABI compatible because you still have major versions with CentOS Stream, ie: 8,9 and 10. All updates that get pushed into CentOS Stream have gone through a testing process and have been approved to end up in the next minor RHEL version. So CentOS Stream is basically Pre-release RHEL.
 
Well I walk everywhere up to about 5-7km (3-4 miles).

In America, we drive anywhere that's more than 50 meters away. (To be fair, I'm almost 40 km to the nearest village.)

But, we're pretty far off topic.

That said, CentOS is different. It's not what it used to be. That doesn't mean it's a bad distro, it just means that they have changed their goals and product.
 

Staff online

Members online


Top