The amount of GNU/Linux distros could be brought down to three

The amount of GNU/Linux distros could be brought down to three.
(KXL)Ubuntu for basic desktop usage.
Arch for bleeding edge software.
Debian for a secure and stable server.
All other distros are obsolete.

Attached: serveimage.png (1200x1363, 290K)

OP you forgot gentoo, faggot

debian is already all of those

Debian sid is not quite as bleeding as Arch.
Also Debian is not as easy to use as Ubuntu.
Therefor not all of those.

This, your list is trash OP

>secure and stable server.
have you heard of CentOS?

Yes, Debian is better is every single way

oh wow, arch is 3 neckbeards upstream from debian sid

The whole point of a distro is to provide out of the box compatibility with your current use case. Why would you make your life hard by removing all special case distros and all distros with alternate configurations which some users prefer? What you want won't be possible until someone makes an installer which lets you manually select which DE and software you want through a GUI, and configures itself properly depending on your software selection. The closest thing to that is openSUSE.

Gentoo, for people who know, what they are doing, and want.

Gentoo for source-based. ChromeOS literally wouldn't exist without Gentoo, for example.

Arch is obsolete

don't forget alpine for routers and solus for kevin.

Why not get rid of ubuntu and simply run debian with your preferred dm? There's not much difference.

Kevin has moved to MacOS. Get with the times

what's replaced Arch user

This is just an elaborate way of saying "hurrr nghhrghgh i use arch hgggh". Arch isn't a good substitute for anything, is not ready for prime time and only megalard autists bother with it.

I'm using Debian actually.

Why are winbabbies so afraid of having choice?

>Arch for bleeding edge software.
Ever heard of Fedora?

it's like crypto

Only three distros is harsh. Give is 5.

>Trisquel for basick destop usage
>Gentoo for everything else. even for basic desktop usage

You guys must not be deploying to government or financial systems... As much as I love Debian and its derivatives for home and prototyping, red hat is still king in the "I have to comply with arcane data handling standards" world. I'm not saying that makes it good, but I do run CentOS on my personal laptop just to keep my familiarity sharp on redhat-esque systems.
PS: docker/kube fanboys prepare your anus for RHEV

what does RHEL/CentOS have that other distros don't that makes it better for dealing with "arcane data handling standards"? SELinux?

And NixOS for reproducibility and confusing DSLs

Replace Arch with Gentoo

They have corporate backing forcing them in to standards documents. I've gotten arch, Solaris, even armbian through the nist requirements- but the Titanic that is redhat has owned a majority of the "national infrastructure" space in the us because they've got a long history of offering Enterprise support contracts.

>Debian is not as easy to use as ubuntu.
Ok now explain to me the difference between Xubuntu and Debian XFCE netinstall

its actually just debian and redhat at the end of the day, anything else is just a hobby distro.

Debian is Redhat at this point

Both are shit, because I can't load WiFi drivers in target system.

correct answer desu

This. Artix has replaced it.

Why make these threads? It's impossible to just get rid of distros, just like I can't wish you out of existence.

RHEL and SUSE are better server distros than Debian

Protip: Ubuntu is a great server platform and has a better stable LTS lifecycle than Debian. It also has well-tested integrations like Openstack.

RHEL is the "paid off the vendor to certify on platform" platform.