- Bleeding edge: up to date packages and Wayland by default.
- Stable, despite the above.
- Secure: pre-configured SELinux among many other features: fedoraproject.org
- Good support, backed by Red Hat.
I understand if you prefer to fine-grain everything and use Arch or Gentoo, but people who use Debian and its derivatives: just why?
>rpm
What's wrong with it? How does it outweight the advantages I listed?
I exclusevely use Fedora and SuSE on desktop machines and laptops, and CentOS *BSD on NAS/DNS/POP/IMPAP/DHCP servers
Fedora 25 won't power off for me. The damn thing just reboots.
The only reason why I wont touch this distro...
why the name fedora WHY
Because you're underage.
what's wrong with it? are you letting shitty neckbeard memes deprive you of a distro because of the name?
I'm considering using fedora too.
My local music people have used fedora sever for quite a while now.
no i'm not
yes, shitty logo too
>fedora server
>6 month release cycle
Hahaha oh wow
>not using CentOS for servers
Clearly you are when you won't use a 14 year old OS because of a 5 year old meme.
DNF is GOAT
Fedora Server != CentOS
That's not CentOS, that's Fedora, but for servers.
CentOS is RHEL without support.
'tips fedora'
Use RHEL if it triggers you so much
Not an argument.
Stay underage.
Ironically, Fedora is the least 'fedora' of every desktop Linux -- the team behind it is employed by RedHat, unlike your typical distro, which is maintained by a bunch of three hundred pound men who met on an anime IRC
>bleeding edge
define "bleeding edge"
>wayland by default
how does that make it better? what are the real advantages of using wayland on a desktop?
>stable despite the above
and so are debian, opensuse, gentoo and slackware
> secure
As secure as the ones listed above
>pre-configured SELinux among many other features
such as?
>Good support
As any of the major distros, being backed by redhat doesn't add anything really.
if you aren't physically underage you are mentally, which is arguably worse
Xorg is insecure as fuck. It's a joke, it needs to be destroyed.
Care to backup that? How is wayland better?
>CentOS and fedora are different
Yeah, no shit idiot.
Why do you need the support of RHEL?
>please use fedora, we need more beta testers for redhat
FTFY
In every way. Buffer handling, drawing primitives, etc. X11 makes the system run a lot of unnecessary rounds. Google it.
I never said I need, or you need it.
I was just stating a fact, CentOS is a good server OS.
Nice argument, you're definitely not a shill, nor a troll.
Every application rendered by Xorg can read every other application's keystrokes, modify its input, etc.
Like... Xorg has been terrible since the early 90s. It's always been awful for my entire life.
For what reason would anyone want to defend X11, even its makers and maintainers want you to move to wayland and actively support it.
you still havent debunked my argument you hermit I refuse to associate myself with a fedora
you don't have an argument to debunk
> Stable
Puhlease.
You have no argument.
>even its makers and maintainers want you to move to wayland and actively support it.
You can't write that and not post any link or whatever to back it up.
I'm not defending X11, but I would like you to tell me why is wayland any better.
>Every application rendered by Xorg can read every other application's keystrokes, modify its input, etc
You got proof of that? How does that makes wayland better? Is that the only reason?
What the fuck is wrong with you? Fucking read about it yourself, you low-wealth retard.
Tell me how to break it if it's so unstable.
So no proof? okay.
That doesn't say anything about xorg makers and mantainers wanting people to use wayland instead of xorg
Congratulations, retard. You've 'won' an internet argument in your own head. You're too frustrating and the other people give up on you! Success! You must have been right!
That's not okay, I don't want you to think you lost an argument, I want you to bakcup what you're saying, that's all, you don't need to get so butthurt about it.
>backed by Red Hat.
Welp, that right there just ruined any chance in me giving Fedora a shot. Thanks OP.
*tips*
X is completely insecure, bloated, complex and, summed up, not adequate for modern computing. It need to be killed as soon as possible.
phoronix.com
All I do in Linux is web browse - why should I use this instead of Xubuntu or something else?
Get a tablet.
By browse I mean with like 70 tabs open.
I actually like Tablet + external keyboard form factor but anything cheap is atom garbage. If Surfaces were cheaper I would have bought one.
X is a bunch of stuff but only a fraction of it is ever really used in modern software. The reason you cannot just remove all of that *stuff* is that it would break compatibility with X based software. On top of that, the way X handles the stuff that is used is usually not optimal, it may have known deficiencies or bugs. Again the bugs and deficiencies cannot be fixed because they would break X based software. Wayland is a clean break, it's a new implementation of the most useful part of X (the protocol) and the other stuff that made X work is left up to the downstream devs to handle. It's basically X but decentralized. The decentralization is why it's taking so long for it to be rolled out, a lot of software *already* supports the protocol but there's only like one major display server (mutter of GNOME3) that supports the wayland protocol so far.
>As secure as the ones listed above
Nope!
Debian, for example, is a total disaster when it comes to security. Debian barely has any security features, including ones that are standard in almost all other distros.
It doesn't have any MAC framework (like AppArmor or SELinux), nor stack protection, ASLR, PIE packages... it baffles me how it can be considered a "server OS". Ubuntu is actually more secure, it comes with some of these features (for example, it uses AppArmor).
Retarded release cycles make Fedora a huge pain in the ass. I'd use it if it were a rolling release.
You'd rather have it backed by autists and NEETs? You may not like Red Hat and its associates like the systemd asshole crew, but they are a guarantee of long term development and support.
>Wayland by default.
How is that good. wayland is not close to being ready. It broke so much shit. xWayland does not fix anything. It also used almost 1W more on average on my laptop. But people keep singing its praise just because muh animations are smoother.
I'm losing a lot of the little hope I had in this board with this thread. If you don't know why Wayland is miles better just stop posting.
autists can do a great job, they're socially inneficient, but when it comes to getting shit done, as long as they have a minimum piece of joy by doing it, it'll get done. A company can go bankrupt at any point, but there will always be autists.
NEETs can't do anything, I don't know how you can think a neet can write a script, let alone mantain a software package.
wayland is not ready, xwayland is garbage. stop pushing beta tier broken software
XWayland is an X display server running as a wayland client. It's as garbage as X was.
works well for me
I know all the technical reason why it is 'meant' to be better. But the fact is RH has a history of pushing shit out before it's ready just to oneup any opposition. In this case mir. And why should someone who does not know the technical reasons care. They push it out for default like it's the newest greatest thing but breaks all the shit.
First distro I ever used was Ubuntu and since my few Arch encounters ended with me being a little befuddled, I'll stick with Deb-based distros.
Also, saying something is Pre-configured in Linux makes me feel like they don't trust me with my shit.
By pre-configured I mean sane defaults, which is rather uncommon on the Linux landscape.
>It doesn't have any MAC framework (like AppArmor or SELinux), nor stack protection, ASLR, PIE packages
wiki.debian.org
This page says Debian supports those things apparently.
Although apparently Debian actually *doesn't* come with either SELinux or AppArmor, you have to install one manually afterward.
Ah, okay.
I know this is off-topic, but is there a way to move all settings and programs from Kali linux to regular Debian? People keep telling me Kali isn't a normal distro, but I still don't know why. I could just put the official debian apt repos to my apt sources. What is the difference between Kali and regular Debian?
Setting up SELinux from scratch is a pain in the fucking ass.
Shame SELinux is always misconfigured out of the box. Every upgrade is an exciting new opportunity to re-learn how audit2allow works.
Not really
Does it have apt-get?
>does it have the absolute worst package manager and resolution dependency library
No, thank God.
Oh I misunderstood. Debian's kernel *does* come with SELinux it just doesn't have it enabled by default.
There's a page to enable and configure it.
wiki.debian.org
lmao doesn't use the best distro because "shitty name and shitty logo" lmao lmao
>People keep telling me Kali isn't a normal distro, but I still don't know why
you're only using kali because you think it makes you sound like a leet hackr, but you are actually so stupid you don't know you're stupid. why aren't you cringing?