So i really wanted to ditch windows once and for all so i’ve tried Linux for a week trying different distros (debian, manjaro, ubuntu, opensuse, mint) and first of all why? Why are there so many distros out there? What’s the difference between debian + kde and manjaro + kde? They look the same, they work the same. I don’t get it. Also why do things have to be complicated? I’ve installed debian, installed calibre to manage my ebooks, created a library from an existing library on my hard drive (not the one with debian installed), ERROR! All the files are read-only. What???? I’ve followed multiple guides on how to change permissions and finally solved the problem. Now let’s restart my pc. files on the hard drive are read only WHAT???? Fuck debian, let’s go on manjaro. No problems at all on calibre. Managed to create the library as easy as i did on windows. My question is: where’s the fun in this? It’s just problems, after problems, after problems and i didn’t even start gaming. I mean i tried installing retroarch and importing my saves but of course nothing works. Read this guide, read that guide. Nope. Nothing works. Ok, fuck retroarch let’s customize the appearance of my desktop: move some icons on the panel, center this, adjust height, move this on the left, spent 30 minutes tweaking, very nice… kde crashes, all back to default. Let’s download some apps. I want as many apps that i already know as possible. Let’s see if jdownloader is available for linux. Yep there’s one. Nope, not for manjaro (officially). There’s a AUR package available. Nice. What do i need to do to install a AUR package? A wall of text on the wiki, 20 minutes videos, yay. Ok let’s call it a day. Do i need to live another life to make linux work?
this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2024
-11 points (33.3% liked)
Linux
48180 readers
1353 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's like asking how will you learn to swim if you start in a pool where you can reach the bottom. First of all under the hood Ubuntu and Gentoo are 99% the same, the main differences are philosophical, almost everything you learn for Ubuntu will carry over to any other distro. But if you try jumping straight into the deep end you will be overwhelmed. I mentioned Gentoo because you usually compile your own kernel when using it, how can you possibly learn Linux without compiling your own kernel!? But the majority of people who know Linux nowadays have never done so, and you shouldn't need to either. The same applies to all the thousand paper cuts you're inflicting to yourself for choosing a distro whose philosophy doesn't include being beginner friendly.
For the time being, yes. But here's the thing, if everything else is working, figuring out how to install a package manually is simple, but if you're struggling with 100 other things you will be overwhelmed by it. Tell me, when was the last time you downloaded an .APK from a random site on the internet to install something on your phone? It's the same thing.
Weird, that used to work last I used Debian based with KDE.
Nope, I could install that in 1 min, because I know what I'm doing, so I know how to install dependencies. But you don't, so you shouldn't try to install stuff manually. For starters I would have added a PPA instead of manually installing a .deb, that way the package would get updated and apt would install the dependencies automatically, if that wasn't an option or I was feeling lazy I would have just installed using snap/flatpacks, or if I had to install using a .deb, I would just use apt to do it to autoresolve dependencies. The fact that half of what I said there sounds like gibberish is the reason why you shouldn't do it. It's equivalent of someone who can't even use Android properly asking you how to install an APK not on the play store, first learn the basics, then you can do complex stuff.
No contradictions, let's go over one by one
Yes, but each dependency is its own package, so when you install one package you might be installing several. But if you try to install one package manually (via dpkg) you don't get the packages it depends on (because dpkg is a glorified unzip, it doesn't know how to fetch dependencies).
Exactly, unlike dpkg, apt does know how to install the dependencies, so it would do it automatically.
Yes, but you're missing the point, a single library doesn't weight that much, a dozen copies of that same library do. You installed KDE, so you probably had these apps (among others):
The KDE library is 150/200MB, so on Windows each of those application on it's own weights at least 200MB, so probably you're looking at 2GB for 10 apps that use the KDE library. On Linux they weight very small amount, because all of them use the same KDE library which is installed system-wide. Maybe some of those also use other libraries, but if you install anything else that uses that same library the library won't be duplicated the same way it is on Windows, where each installer is self-contained and brings all of the libraries it needs to work.
There are two main advantages:
And the disadvantages are:
So overall it has 2 huge benefits and no downsides as long as you use the package manager.
It was Debian with xfce.
Wasn't this the OS of freedom? Hmmm
I tried to install ISO image writer on Ubuntu, on my laptop. Went straight to the package manager, no terminal bullshit, downloaded it, open button is greyed out. Fantastic. Stable version btw. Solved by uninstalling and installing another version available on the manager. Linux is literally problems after problems after problems.
Like, download the APK, enable Unknown sources, tap on the icon? I don't use android since 2017 but i'm pretty sure is the same, isn't it? Not an happy comparison.
When i want to uninstall and app and all the dependencies connected to it (autoremove, right?) is Linux able to tell if some of those dependencies are necessary for other apps and "whitelist" them?
Yes, you're also free to shoot yourself in the foot. Do what you want, I'm trying to prevent you from hurting yourself, but you're free to do so of you so wish.
Ubuntu already comes with an iso image writer.
What program? How did you run it? What are you trying to do, you need to be a lot more specific,
Package managers only have one version, so that shouldn't be possible.
Again, at least once you didn't installed it via the package manager, so at least once you shot yourself in the foot. I'm guessing it was the first time, and you installed a snap/flatpacks which maybe required especial permissions for accessing USB devices.
Yes, it's the same, try explaining that to your grandma who doesn't know how to answer a call and you'll quickly tell her to first learn to use the basics before wanting to enable external sources and installing random stuff from the internet.
Yes, it keeps track of which things use what, autoremove removes things that were installed as dependencies but nothing else depends on them now. So for example if you uninstall Ark and that was the only thing using unzip, running autoremove would get rid of the unzip library.