• pineapple@lemmy.mlEnglish
      2·
      10 hours ago

      I heard that somewhere too. It might have been a while ago but he has said publicly a few times that he doesn’t care much about which distro he uses doesn’t switch very often.

    • Bilb!@lemmy.mlEnglish
      51·
      11 hours ago

      I hung out with him in Vegas and he’s 100% a windows guy

    • vandsjov@feddit.dk
      51·
      17 hours ago

      Fun video that shows Torvald is not the best person to judge about if a distribution is good or bad - he’s just your average user.

      • kirk781@discuss.tchncs.de
        111·
        1 day ago

        I once gave Trisquel a try back in the day. It’s one of those FSF approved distros right? My use case was more ahem, standard rather than anything programming related. Either case, one evening, I ran into a dependency hell trying to install a simple Direct Connect client onto it and no matter how much I tried I couldn’t succeed.

        I then decided to move back to Debian. Either case, most distros have Eiskaltdcpp (as one example of a client) in their repos, except for Trisquel. This was multiple years ago. I am currently on Void.

        • Resplendent606@piefed.socialEnglish
          81·
          1 day ago

          This is the experience I imagine I would have trying it. It is probably what anyone with a modern system would experience with proprietary firmware. From what I read, Trisquel’s core philosophy is to include only free software and Eiskaltdcpp most likely relies on some non-free dependencies.

          I like Debian. I am currently trying Fedora and it has been good, too. Void is on my list of “distros to someday try” as it sounds super interesting using runit, XBPS, and not relying on systemd.

          • kirk781@discuss.tchncs.de
            5·
            1 day ago

            Yes, Trisquel can be a pain to be used as a daily driver. Whilst I admire the philosophy behind it’s concept, it definitely leaves a lot of end work to be done by the user.

            I have used Fedora for quite some time in the past . I think Fedora and now discontinued Cent OS were two RPM based distros (I think Fedora now uses Dnf as well) I have used. Cent OS I liked decently, it wasn’t as bleeding edge as Fedora and for a long time I dual booted Cent OS and Debian.

            Void is decent independent distro. Ironically I don’t have any anti systemd feelings and just gave it a try for heck of it and stuck to it. I think there is a musl version of Void as well but that makes things only complicated.

            • 𝕽𝖚𝖆𝖎𝖉𝖍𝖗𝖎𝖌𝖍@midwest.social
              4·
              1 day ago

              (I’m replying to you twice b/c totally different topics)

              Tell me more about your Void experience. I’ve been meaning to give it a shot, except I don’t get as much enjoyment out of fussing with distros as I used to. What are the pain points? Under Artix, I used dinit which I really liked, but I tried s6 first and absolutely hated it. I didn’t try runit; how is it?

              What I’m most interested in is xbps, because IMO it’s the package manager that makes or breaks a system. I’m quite fond of pacman and have encountered far fewer dependency hell situations than I did with either rpm or deb, and rolling release is a must. xbps looks kind of like a rolling stable release?

              • kirk781@discuss.tchncs.de
                5·
                1 day ago

                Void is rolling release IIRC. The package manager is quite fast and gets the job done. The pain point is that Void has a lower selection of package in its repos compared to say, Arch. Some good stuff is there (for example I was looking for a third party Spotify client ncspot? Back in the day and it was packaged in Void’s repos) but if someone uses niche stuff a lot, there can be issues.

                Of course there is Flatpak support. And the system itself is comparatively lean and fast. I don’t think my installation of Void came with plenty of pre-installed apps.

                It ships in two builds : glibc or musl. The latter one is less favored because it only makes life tougher honestly. Runit support is a strong point of it though personally I don’t have any anti systemd qualms.

                The documentation is basic and okayish. I still often go to Arch Wiki since that’s honestly the most detailed. Also, I just found that it’s the highest rated distro on Distro Watch. I have distro hopped a long time and Void is decent. I still hold Debian in higher regard since it’s slightly easier for a novice to get used to (though it’s repos can be hold often old versions of software) and also because it was my main entry point to the Linux world.

                • 𝕽𝖚𝖆𝖎𝖉𝖍𝖗𝖎𝖌𝖍@midwest.social
                  2·
                  23 hours ago

                  Void is rolling release IIRC

                  That’s what I thought, but the main website says Void focuses on stability over being cutting edge, which would imply some sort of release cycle. Or, maybe they just update packages less frequently.

                  I still hold Debian in higher regard since it’s slightly easier for a novice to get used to

                  It’s hard to beat Mint as a novice distro, for sure.

            • 𝕽𝖚𝖆𝖎𝖉𝖍𝖗𝖎𝖌𝖍@midwest.social
              3·
              1 day ago

              I feel the same way about Artix. I had it on my laptop for a while, and it was a regular PITA. I think I may have made it harder on myself, because while getting rid of systemd was fine, I was also trying to do without NetworkManager and on a laptop that wasn’t a great idea. I never did find a good, reliable set-up that managed access point hopping as well as nm.

              Really, thinking back, Artix was fine; it really was just the roaming WiFi handling that gave me grief, and I did that to myself.

      • PenguinCoder@beehaw.orgEnglish
        121·
        2 days ago

        uses a version of Ubuntu’s modified kernel, with the non-free code (binary blobs) removed.[8

        Why not just Debian without non-free, at that point?

        • Resplendent606@piefed.socialEnglish
          31·
          2 days ago

          Because Debian does not meet the strict requirements of the FSF. It includes non-free blobs in the kernel and the FSF claims Debian “steers” users with recommendations for installing non-free plugins or codecs. Some “contrib” packages, while free themselves, exist primarily to load separately distributed proprietary programs. There are also references in the Debian documentation and official channels that suggest obtaining non-free software for functionality.

          edit: typos

        • kemnz@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          1412·
          2 days ago

          I saw an interview where he was saying he objected to Debian adding non-free blobs so he had them put on GNU’s shit list.

          Dude is cuckoo for coco puffs.

          • Resplendent606@piefed.socialEnglish
            352·
            2 days ago

            While I think it would be too hard for most people to be completely free of proprietary software, atleast he is practicing what he preaches. It is a nice goal to someday get there, but I don’t think its realistic at the moment.

            Kind in mind, though, he is 72 and I don’t think he even codes anymore. His computer use probably only consists of mostly Emac (for all text based work) and a web browser (which I read he has a very particular method that involves something similar to wget, lynx, and konqueror). His computer use is very light (I imagine) compared to many Linux users.

            While I aspire to and appreciate what the FSF advocates, I don’t see a realistic path for myself as a Linux gamer. The proprietary firmware limitations alone would keep you on 2015 hardware.

            Source: https://kottke.org/15/05/how-richard-stallman-does-his-computing

    • Zetta@mander.xyz
      4·
      1 day ago

      I think he was only using it to work on the MacBook, Which, I really don’t think is his daily driver.