sxan

Arch. Or, rather EndeavourOS. I've lived with several distros (daily driver desktops, laptops, servers) for years: debian, Ubuntu, Gobo, gentoo, Redhat, CentOS, Arch, Artix, and EndeavourOS. Redhat was my least favorite, and EndeavourOS probably my most.

I'm currently running Endeavour on my desktop, Artix on my laptop, and vanilla Arch on several servers and ancillary devices. All of the Arches are basically the same day-to-day, except Artix; Artix is the lightest, but also the most work, and I probably wouldn't choose it again.

I like Arch because - for me - it's been stable and pain-free from dependency-hell, of which Redhat distros were the worst. I will not go back to any point release distro - rolling release has been so much better for me. The Arch wiki is the best source of Linux information on the internet, and the AUR has almost everything in it, and is easy to contribute to. PKGBUILDs are easy to write; it's hardly any more work to put one together to install something and have it managed by the package manager, than to not.

I'm interested in playing more with some of the source-based distros like void, alpine, tinycore, venom, and kiss; my experience with gentoo leads me to believe I won't be happy with any as daily drivers.

However, I'm very interested in Chimera.

I maintain some software, and Nix is by far the hardest to deal with. To package config files are relatively complex, and to submit a package you have to download the entire Nix repo, which is huge. Getting a package to build correctly can be a challenge.

It's a pretty large ask for software contributors, who may have to iteract with a half dozen different distros. Now, you could say, leave it to the distro people to do the packaging, but it remains a barrier for entry and is by nature exclusive.

I don't use NixOS, so I have little motivation to stay conversant with Nix and, frankly, it's so demanding I don't bother anymore. I can make RPM, deb, and aur packages trivially, and without having to hold Gb of some package repo (which I otherwise don't use) on my disk.

I was going to suggest the opposite. I have nothing but problems with fractional scaling on Wayland, which is one of the main reasons I still run X. My main workstation has 3 monitors, and X's fractional scaling works smoothly.

With a lot of distros defaulting to Wayland, it'd be interesting to know which OP is running, and causing them grief. Does Pop!OS use X only for now?

So, CUDA is SIMD for (or backed by) GPUs?

Haven't seen an ad since I've been using Tubular (previously NewPipe + blockers). Why is revanced better?

It is so stupid that this app is needed, and so useful.

It's never in Recents. Recents is utterly useless unless you're using one of the Google apps, and even then it's unreliable.

K, this is one of those "and now I'm afraid to ask" memes, but comnents like yours have me super confused. What's all the CUDA about?

I have 2 machines with AMD CPU/GPU hardware. SOC maybe? I really didn't pay much attention outside of wanting the extra CPU cores for... reasons. They're both Ryzen, one's a 5, 'tother a 7. The GPU component has always worked fantastically, but I don't stress it much as I'm not a gamer. The CPU component has been a dream for my many-threaded needs. And so I'm confused when people chip in about this news complaining about AMD. What, exactly, isn't working for people, and why don't I notice it?

It's just wierd. Sort of vim-ish, but mostly not. The bindings are really NIH - makes sense to the author, I guess, but it could have been so much easier if a few more of the key bindings were shared with... anything else. It's an entirely new modality I have to switch to whenever I use it.

I think the biggest stumbling block is that it's almost vim key bindings, and the muscle memory betrayed me in the cases where it isn't. I still have to bring up the help occasionally for the stuff I use less frequently, b/c I can't trust it'll be something sensibly from vim or readline.

You see what the common factor here in OP's problems is, though, right? Flatpack and Snap - whether you're pro or con - are new and have warts, and the distros jumping to them are "easy, beginner-friendly" ones. Sure, installing an add-on for the wrong OS for some software is bound to cause problems; that's not a Linux-specific issue. But the sorts of issues OP is complaining about are because of complications caused by the software distribution mechanism, issues that had long been resolved on many distros.

I think I saw this in an episode of Blue Eye Samurai.

nnn has the worst learning curve, but at least the number of commands is brief and all fit on the one help page. I was wishy-washy on it until the selection improvements last year, but now I reach for it about half the time I do anything file/dir related - even the short things, and 100% for anything batch-related.