 DistroWatch Weekly |
| Tip Jar |
If you've enjoyed this week's issue of DistroWatch Weekly, please consider sending us a tip.
(Tips this week: 1, value: US$5) |
|
|
|
 bc1qxes3k2wq3uqzr074tkwwjmwfe63z70gwzfu4lx  lnurl1dp68gurn8ghj7ampd3kx2ar0veekzar0wd5xjtnrdakj7tnhv4kxctttdehhwm30d3h82unvwqhhxarpw3jkc7tzw4ex6cfexyfua2nr  86fA3qPTeQtNb2k1vLwEQaAp3XxkvvvXt69gSG5LGunXXikK9koPWZaRQgfFPBPWhMgXjPjccy9LA9xRFchPWQAnPvxh5Le paypal.me/distrowatchweekly • patreon.com/distrowatch |
|
| Extended Lifecycle Support by TuxCare |
|
|
| Reader Comments • Jump to last comment |
1 • Filesystem flags (by DC on 2023-07-10 01:09:29 GMT from United States)
Wait a minute. You have to list what all of the default mount options('filesystem flags') are before we can tell if our distros are using custom mount options (flags) or not...
2 • Filesystem flags (by Jesse on 2023-07-10 02:15:52 GMT from Canada)
@1: >> "Wait a minute. You have to list what all of the default mount options('filesystem flags') are before we can tell if our distros are using custom mount options (flags) or not..."
If you have any custom flags set, they'll be in the /etc/fstab file. If no custom flags are set, the feature column will say (literally) "defaults".
3 • Solus, Respect & Trust (by CorpSouth on 2023-07-10 02:53:59 GMT from United States)
I've been reading testimonials about Solus going back to before the project had stagnated for two years. One has to understand that respect and trust are two way streets, and the attitudes of the maintainers haven't been representative of those tenants, apparently. They're going to need to be aggressive about moving the project forward.
4 • Crystal Linux (by Olexander on 2023-07-10 02:57:46 GMT from Ukraine)
Unfortunately Crystal's iso on their Gitlab is old.
And yeah, it's buggy.
(actually I couldn't managed it to boot on my laptop)
But after I joining Discord channel I've got link to the fresh iso.
It booted and even installed without crashes.
I can say guys are working hard to clean bugs.
So please give them another try.
5 • Mount-Flags (by Dr.J on 2023-07-10 08:09:29 GMT from Germany)
I use a lot of mount flags, because it's like you say: you can use them to customize your system to your needs, which is especially useful if you have a lot of mounts (two disks, multiple partitions, mounting network or NFS drives, etc.).
6 • Mount flags (by nsp0323 on 2023-07-10 09:45:58 GMT from Sweden)
Voted: "Yes - I set custom flags" but, it's a bit of a lie.
Everything is default, except for "noatime" and "nodevmtime"
7 • Fedora's telemetry (by Bluecow on 2023-07-10 17:46:37 GMT from United States)
Red Hat's closed source, Fedora's spying their users (100% anonymously, of course).
I can imagine some ads coming to Fedora's start menu soon after that. Things like Disney+ and Outlook 365 promos, just like in W11.
8 • Fedora Telementry (by nickydi on 2023-07-11 01:41:46 GMT from Australia)
Red Hats love child "Fedora" wanting telemetry inside there distro. OMG what has happened to the Linux World... it has gone completely mad. Lets tell them at first we are only collecting a lttle bit of data like such and such, then the next few releases we will really ramp up the game and get there info just like all the other no good company's trying to harvest peoples data. Linux used to be great but now its just like all the rest, "Corrupt".
9 • Tweakers (by Trihexagonal on 2023-07-11 05:47:49 GMT from United States)
"Mount flags can be used to tune performance or provide additional functionality."
The biggest mistake people new to Linux or BSD by far was tweaking this and fiddling with that when they don't yet have the learned skills to fix what didn't need fixed in the first place.
Then some will become frustrated, find something about the OS to mumble about (Because what else could it be?) Kick rocks at Tux and go back to Windows.
Which is all good and fine with me as long as I'm not the one who has to fix it. Chaff from the wheat, Natures Way and all that..
10 • Fedora telemetry (by Christian on 2023-07-11 12:05:44 GMT from Canada)
Back in Fedora 7 there was "smolt" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smolt_%28Linux%29). It was included by default and I can't remember it raising many concerns in the community. A few years later Ubuntu started something similar, but it was not very well received.
I've not being using used Fedora for a while, but, I would share telemetry from my system to contribute with the project.
11 • Smolt (by Otis on 2023-07-11 14:47:34 GMT from United States)
@10 yes Smolt seemed to usher in that mindset (of devs working with other entities to harvest hardware info on linux machines). It's usage info that made me nervous, but that's another conversation.
I see that only 5 distros shipped that little piece of ware, but the philosophy of it is now commonplace, of course.
12 • telemetry (by GrumpyGranpa on 2023-07-12 02:50:32 GMT from Australia)
One reason people came to linux was to get away from the privacy nightmare that is Windows and its data collection.
As soon as IBM became involved with Redhat, we allsort of guessed that down the road they would want to recoup their investment. Selling licences is fine, but data harvesting is another revenue stream.
Fortunately, we are swamped with choice. Don't like data collection, no problem. Don't like systemd, no problem. Don't like desktop xyz, no problem.
Fragmentation of distros is an issue from a dev pool point of view, but also a blessing for the rest of us who can pick and choose what we want to use.
13 • Opt-in works, just ask Debian (by Andy Prough on 2023-07-12 14:19:52 GMT from United States)
Fedora's argument against opt-in telemetry is based on a lie, claiming that opt-in never works.
Debian's popularity-contest package (popcon) has always been completely opt-in - you have to install the package for it to work. It has hundreds of thousands of users and has been giving a vast amount of Debian usage information for the past 25 years now.
14 • Fedora telemetry (by Dan on 2023-07-12 15:37:53 GMT from Israel)
I fully support developers' right to collect telemetry, as long as it's not invasive, described in an honest transparent way in the UI, and there's a way to fully disable it. It all depends on the type of information that is collected. Anyone who cries about their "privacy" just because there *is* telemetry collected, without having not even a *single* look into the type of data collected, is an idiot.
15 • Telemetry opt-in vs. opt-out (by Dan on 2023-07-12 15:52:43 GMT from Israel)
@13
"Fedora's argument against opt-in telemetry is based on a lie, claiming that opt-in never works."
I've had a brief look and that's not what was said.
"Debian's popularity-contest package (popcon) has always been completely opt-in… It has hundreds of thousands of users and has been giving a vast amount of Debian usage information…"
First, this is an anecdote. Second, Debian and Fedora might have users with completely different mindsets. And third, this doesn't refute the argument that people who uncaringly use default settings could contribute telemetry using an opt-out scheme but not using an opt-in scheme, while users who do care about settings would contribute the same telemetry regardless of whether it's opt-in or opt-out. Objectively, opt-out is better.
16 • @15 (by Andy Prough on 2023-07-12 17:41:10 GMT from United States)
>"I've had a brief look and that's not what was said."
Here's what is said in the Fedora proposal exactly: "This is to ensure the system is opt-out, not opt-in. This is essential because we know that opt-in metrics are not very useful."
I said that they said "never works", they actually said "not very useful". Not much difference between the two, but ok you are right that there is a difference, but the same outcome in their decision making.
>"First, this is an anecdote."
No, it's a decades long test with vast quantities of data. An anecdote is a single data point.
>"Second, Debian and Fedora might have users with completely different mindsets."
Why? What is potentially different about their mindsets? You haven't written a refutation, merely that you aren't willing to consider the point that Debian has collected vast amounts of useful data with an opt-in system. Unfortunately for your argument, the facts tell a dramatically different story.
>"And third, this doesn't refute the argument that people who uncaringly use default settings could contribute telemetry using an opt-out scheme but not using an opt-in scheme, while users who do care about settings would contribute the same telemetry regardless of whether it's opt-in or opt-out. Objectively, opt-out is better."
Wrong. Opt-out is better if Fedora wants to sneakily trick some people into not disabling telemetry who are trying to quickly install the system without reading all the verbiage. But once again, Debian's 25 successful years of popcon proves that undoubtedly opt-out is not inherently better.
17 • telemetry @15 (by Anthony on 2023-07-12 19:15:04 GMT from Czechia)
@15 Objectively, opt-out is better.
Funny you should appeal to objectivity, when your statement isn't true. Opt-out is worse from a privacy-focused viewpoint. It is better if you *only* consider the viewpoint of the one collecting (and supposedly "needing") the data. Nice fallacy. =)
@14
Another nice fallacy. No-one has the *right* to collect someone else's information. Information should be voluntarily given, not taken. That's one huge difference between the legal systems of the US and the EU. Arguing for unregulated and opt-out data collection is idiocy, especially if you make fallacies like you. (How the *supposedly* different mindsets of Debian- and Fedora users come into the topic of data collection is beyond reason...)
Keep up the circus show, folks. :)
18 • It seems that some people think they're smarter than logic (by Dan on 2023-07-12 20:17:27 GMT from Israel)
@16
"No, it's a decades long test with vast quantities of data. An anecdote is a single data point."
Irrelevant. You cannot deduce anything from this data, you can only induce, and induction isn't a logical way to get conclusions, it uses intuition, and thus it's prone to failure. (Deduction is prone as well to failure, if the method or the base assumptions are wrong, but with induction, there's *never* a guarantee that the conclusion is true, unlike deduction where it could be guaranteed to be true.)
"Why? What is potentially different about their mindsets? You haven't written a refutation, merely that you aren't willing to consider the point that Debian has collected vast amounts of useful data with an opt-in system. Unfortunately for your argument, the facts tell a dramatically different story."
What is potentially different about their mindsets is lots of things. This should be quite obvious to you, but apparently isn't. In any case, it is your responsibility to prove that their mindsets are universally always identical, and not my responsibility to prove that their mindsets aren't identical, because (surprise to you!) that's how logic works. I haven't refuted your data, because there's no need to; I've refuted the core of your reasoning (and also later provided a logical proof that opt-out is never worse than opt-in for collecting representative statistics). Unfortunately for your argument, you're just plain wrong and illogical. And unfortunately for you, facts tell different stories depending how you process them, and this is why the reasoning you use to conclude on the basis of facts is important as well.
"Wrong. Opt-out is better if Fedora wants to sneakily trick some people into not disabling telemetry who are trying to quickly install the system without reading all the verbiage."
Wrong. Out-out has nothing to do with the aspect of being "sneaky" (read: dishonest) nor with the actual data that's being collected. Apart from the opt-out aspect, there's also the aspect of how telemetry and the options to control telemetry are presented to users, and the aspect of whether the data that's ultimately collected contains anything that could be linked to an individual user or a group of users. There's not yet any proof that any arbitrary piece of information could be linked to the user(s) it was collected from, meaning that it's possible that telemetry could respect the privacy of the users it was collected from. Additionally, regarding the opt-out/opt-in aspect and the aspect of dishonesty in how telemetry is presented to users and given control of, the burden of proving that these two aspects are inherently linked together somehow is, again, on you.
"Debian's 25 successful years of popcon proves that undoubtedly…"
You're using words like "proves" and "undoubtedly" without understanding the most basic things about logic, thinking that you're convincing. Maybe others, but I see past your logical fallacies. Funny.
----------------
@17
"Funny you should appeal to objectivity, when your statement isn't true. Opt-out is worse from a privacy-focused viewpoint. It is better if you *only* consider the viewpoint of the one collecting (and supposedly "needing") the data. Nice fallacy. =)"
Funny that you're speaking of fallacies. The burden of proving that the aspect of opt-out/opt-in and the aspect of whether data collected breaches the privacy of the users it was collected from is on you. Since you've mindlessly assumed this unproven base assumption without backing it up in the first place, you've just ironically made fallacy! Congratulations. I, in contrast, have *proven* that opt-out is always at least as good as opt-in for gathering representative statistics, so yeah, it is objectively better than opt-in schemes, because there's nothing to lose and it unlocks the potential for better stats.
"Another nice fallacy. No-one has the *right* to collect someone else's information. Information should be voluntarily given, not taken."
Of course it is a right. Nobody forces you to run any privacy-invasive free-as-in-freedom operating system.
"Information should be voluntarily given, not taken."
You have already volunteered, the moment you chose to install that operating system. Perhaps you think that because the operating system is free as in freedom, you have the right to run the OS and hold the developers legally or morally responsible for whatever you dislike in it. Perhaps you forget that the OS is given to you under a license; it doesn't even matter which license, because the mere concept of licensing is based on the principle that somebody gives you access to their copyrighted creation provided that you agree to their conditions. It is the creator who has the right to design their creation however they like. And perhaps you forget that you cannot hold developers liable for any damages that occur to you rising from your use of the software.
"That's one huge difference between the legal systems…"
Funny that you talk about law.
"Arguing for unregulated…"
I didn't argue about any regulation. I had argued about morals, copyright law, and technical advantages and disadvantages of opt-in and opt-out telemetry schemes.
"…and opt-out data collection is idiocy…"
Idiocy? Prove that I am an idiot. You'll have a hard time doing it, because I ain't one.
"…especially if you make fallacies like you."
lol
"How the *supposedly* different mindsets of Debian- and Fedora users come into the topic of data collection is beyond reason..."
Perhaps the reason is beyond you, so here it is: Users either seek or don't seek telemetry collection settings, and (assuming that there's telemetry collection and a setting to control it, which is a fair assumption because it's exactly relevant to the topic at hand) are presented either with an already enabled setting ("out-out") or already disabled ("opt-in"). Given that all other aspects of the telemetry collection is the same in all evaluated cases (which again is a fair assumption because it's relevant to the argument at hand), users that do seek telemetry settings will get the same result with either opt-in and opt-out schemes, while users who don't seek will get different results and affect the amount of telemetry that the developers ultimately collect. The question is, which users fall into the category of the users who do seek such options, and which users don't? This question is directly relevant to the discussion because, as I've explained, the natural categorization of users into these two categories is what changes whether the telemetry collected could be more complete or less complete. Mindsets of users is what makes them fall into one of these two categories, which is the reason why "the *supposedly* different mindsets of Debian- and Fedora users come into the topic of data collection".
19 • @18 (by Andy Prough on 2023-07-12 22:06:29 GMT from United States)
>"You cannot deduce anything from this data, you can only induce, and induction isn't a logical way to get conclusions, it uses intuition, and thus it's prone to failure."
That's a nice word salad that amounts to nothing, just like the rest of your responses.
I've refuted Fedora's claim that "opt-in metrics are not very useful" with solid evidence from a successful and robust opt-in telemetry program that's been run for decades. The vast quantity of data is available for all to view in the beautiful charts at popcon[dot]debian[dot]org. I'll rest my case and let the jury decide.
20 • @19 Debian Fedora data (by Mr. Moto on 2023-07-13 09:01:39 GMT from Japan)
I'm undecided. I use both Fedora and Debian. When I boot Fedora I get a strong urge to share all my data. When I boot Debian, I suddenly dear for my privacy. Gonna have to choose one or the other as I'm already in the early stages of dissociative identity disorder.
21 • IBM and Red Hat sources (by Jan on 2023-07-13 09:17:24 GMT from Poland)
It seems that IBM is making the same mistake with Red Hat it did with OS/2.
Instead of encouraging Red Hat's even wider adoption and forgetting a bit about enforcement of strict licensing behaviour (forgetting about the short term fiscal goals as Microsoft initially did with Windows)) it clamps down on the user community alienating any good will towards themselves or their product.
If we exclude the possibility of poor judgement, intentional unprofessional behaviour and lack of basic product knowledge, we must assume this IBM's move is exactly the extinguish part of the process of eliminating Red Hat (and Linux in the long term) from existence. We know that linux will never go away, and IBM will exist for as long as the governments need to control their citizens, but it is very likely that IBM will loose its place in the linux world the same way it lost the PC and PC operating system markets. And opt-out telemetry in Fedora is just a confirmation of a complete disregard of everyone's right to privacy and to a complete control over their personal data.
22 • Fedora Telemetry vs. Privacy (by Cubehead on 2023-07-13 14:12:49 GMT from Netherlands)
I definitely am not against the "submit telemetry data switch" in Fedora—without collecting some reliable telemetry data, it is nowadays impossible to develop a reliable product. There is some new HW product almost every day, and one cannot rely on users to be willing to send bug reports, and even less that they are even capable of doing it—even less if it then needs some bug-report account somewhere. Check out the Steam forums to better understand what I mean. "I can't interact with objects (because I skipped the literally very first thing I saw—screen setup)." ;)
Such collecting of telemetry data might have worked in the case of Debian, but Debian and Fedora users are two completely different worlds and mindsets. Many servers across the world run on Debian, and probably the majority of those who sent telemetry data were some Debian admins who have an interest in improved reliability. Fedora is not used as a server platform, and "privacy-aware Joe average," who doesn't understand how the stuff works, won't bother helping the product's development.
It is also important to understand that collecting the telemetry data isn't an attack on your privacy—you lost your privacy that moment when you connected to the internet. Namely, at that moment when you start installing your OS and you have an internet connection, one could start logging server calls, and on each update or software install one would get more data; you'd be again connecting the same repositories, and at the end, if those calls are connected together, one could make an exact profile of each single PC if one only wanted to—they could track you until your entrance doors. What they can't see is that out of 1 million users, gnome-shell crashed 700'000 times on startup, and that's the exact point of telemetry.
This is how the standard setup routine works in Fedora:
https://ibb.co/qpmCCqY
After the OS installation is finished and upon reboot, the user gets the following 8 screens to read, answer, or enter the data. One switch more wouldn't make the day.
23 • Wow (by Dan on 2023-07-13 21:34:16 GMT from Israel)
@19
"word salad that amounts to nothing"
Could you please do what I've done (and still do, right here right now)? That is, back up your argument with details, instead of putting a shallow response like a "word salad"? Take claims I wrote and answer them directly instead of labeling them without backing up with reasoning and details. There's no use in labeling arguments without directly addressing what's brought up in them (or not brought up, in your case). You've got to try a bit harder to be convincing.
"I've refuted Fedora's claim that "opt-in metrics are not very useful" with solid evidence…"
Except our argument here wasn't about that. Whether opt-in schemes are good or useful is completely irrelevant. Reminder: We were comparing opt-in telemetry schemes to opt-out, we weren't discussing whether opt-in schemes are good by themselves. Objectively, opt-out is better than opt-in. Again, perhaps you have limited comprehension skills, so I'll say it again: Opt-out is proven to be *at least* as good as opt-in schemes of telemetry in practice, and objectively it's *always the better choice* because it unlocks the potential for better statistics.
----------------
@20
"…I use both Fedora and Debian. When I boot Fedora I get a strong urge to share all my data. When I boot Debian, I suddenly dear [sic] for my privacy…"
…
"I use both Fedora and Debian"
Seriously? Seriously?? The mindsets of Debian and Fedora users are different because the userbase is different. This should have been obvious. Are you really that stupid to misunderstand the argument as if I was speaking about an intersection of the Debian and Fedora userbases together, implying that switching operating systems causes them to mentally think differently? What the hell dude? Let's see what my first mentioning of this was:
@15 "…Second, Debian and Fedora might have users with completely different mindsets…"
Did you really read this and think I was talking about users who use both Debian and Fedora and have different mindsets for each? Either you're stupid af or you're a next-level troll.
@22 "…but Debian and Fedora users are two completely different worlds and mindsets…"
At least this commenter gets it.
Number of Comments: 23
Display mode: DWW Only • Comments Only • Both DWW and Comments
| | |
| TUXEDO |
TUXEDO Computers - Linux Hardware in a tailor made suite
Choose from a wide range of laptops and PCs in various sizes and shapes at TUXEDOComputers.com. Every machine comes pre-installed and ready-to-run with Linux. Full 24 months of warranty and lifetime support included!
Learn more about our full service package and all benefits from buying at TUXEDO.
|
| Archives |
| • Issue 1088 (2024-09-16): PorteuX 1.6, migrating from Windows 10 to which Linux distro, making NetBSD immutable, AlmaLinux offers hardware certification, Mint updates old APT tools |
| • Issue 1087 (2024-09-09): COSMIC desktop, running cron jobs at variable times, UBports highlights new apps, HardenedBSD offers work around for FreeBSD change, Debian considers how to cull old packages, systemd ported to musl |
| • Issue 1086 (2024-09-02): Vanilla OS 2, command line tips for simple tasks, FreeBSD receives investment from STF, openSUSE Tumbleweed update can break network connections, Debian refreshes media |
| • Issue 1085 (2024-08-26): Nobara 40, OpenMandriva 24.07 "ROME", distros which include source code, FreeBSD publishes quarterly report, Microsoft updates breaks Linux in dual-boot environments |
| • Issue 1084 (2024-08-19): Liya 2.0, dual boot with encryption, Haiku introduces performance improvements, Gentoo dropping IA-64, Redcore merges major upgrade |
| • Issue 1083 (2024-08-12): TrueNAS 24.04.2 "SCALE", Linux distros for smartphones, Redox OS introduces web server, PipeWire exposes battery drain on Linux, Canonical updates kernel version policy |
| • Issue 1082 (2024-08-05): Linux Mint 22, taking snapshots of UFS on FreeBSD, openSUSE updates Tumbleweed and Aeon, Debian creates Tiny QA Tasks, Manjaro testing immutable images |
| • Issue 1081 (2024-07-29): SysLinuxOS 12.4, OpenBSD gain hardware acceleration, Slackware changes kernel naming, Mint publishes upgrade instructions |
| • Issue 1080 (2024-07-22): Running GNU/Linux on Android with Andronix, protecting network services, Solus dropping AppArmor and Snap, openSUSE Aeon Desktop gaining full disk encryption, SUSE asks openSUSE to change its branding |
| • Issue 1079 (2024-07-15): Ubuntu Core 24, hiding files on Linux, Fedora dropping X11 packages on Workstation, Red Hat phasing out GRUB, new OpenSSH vulnerability, FreeBSD speeds up release cycle, UBports testing new first-run wizard |
| • Issue 1078 (2024-07-08): Changing init software, server machines running desktop environments, OpenSSH vulnerability patched, Peppermint launches new edition, HardenedBSD updates ports |
| • Issue 1077 (2024-07-01): The Unity and Lomiri interfaces, different distros for different tasks, Ubuntu plans to run Wayland on NVIDIA cards, openSUSE updates Leap Micro, Debian releases refreshed media, UBports gaining contact synchronisation, FreeDOS celebrates its 30th anniversary |
| • Issue 1076 (2024-06-24): openSUSE 15.6, what makes Linux unique, SUSE Liberty Linux to support CentOS Linux 7, SLE receives 19 years of support, openSUSE testing Leap Micro edition |
| • Issue 1075 (2024-06-17): Redox OS, X11 and Wayland on the BSDs, AlmaLinux releases Pi build, Canonical announces RISC-V laptop with Ubuntu, key changes in systemd |
| • Issue 1074 (2024-06-10): Endless OS 6.0.0, distros with init diversity, Mint to filter unverified Flatpaks, Debian adds systemd-boot options, Redox adopts COSMIC desktop, OpenSSH gains new security features |
| • Issue 1073 (2024-06-03): LXQt 2.0.0, an overview of Linux desktop environments, Canonical partners with Milk-V, openSUSE introduces new features in Aeon Desktop, Fedora mirrors see rise in traffic, Wayland adds OpenBSD support |
| • Issue 1072 (2024-05-27): Manjaro 24.0, comparing init software, OpenBSD ports Plasma 6, Arch community debates mirror requirements, ThinOS to upgrade its FreeBSD core |
| • Issue 1071 (2024-05-20): Archcraft 2024.04.06, common command line mistakes, ReactOS imports WINE improvements, Haiku makes adjusting themes easier, NetBSD takes a stand against code generated by chatbots |
| • Issue 1070 (2024-05-13): Damn Small Linux 2024, hiding kernel messages during boot, Red Hat offers AI edition, new web browser for UBports, Fedora Asahi Remix 40 released, Qubes extends support for version 4.1 |
| • Issue 1069 (2024-05-06): Ubuntu 24.04, installing packages in alternative locations, systemd creates sudo alternative, Mint encourages XApps collaboration, FreeBSD publishes quarterly update |
| • Issue 1068 (2024-04-29): Fedora 40, transforming one distro into another, Debian elects new Project Leader, Red Hat extends support cycle, Emmabuntus adds accessibility features, Canonical's new security features |
| • Issue 1067 (2024-04-22): LocalSend for transferring files, detecting supported CPU architecure levels, new visual design for APT, Fedora and openSUSE working on reproducible builds, LXQt released, AlmaLinux re-adds hardware support |
| • Issue 1066 (2024-04-15): Fun projects to do with the Raspberry Pi and PinePhone, installing new software on fixed-release distributions, improving GNOME Terminal performance, Mint testing new repository mirrors, Gentoo becomes a Software In the Public Interest project |
| • Issue 1065 (2024-04-08): Dr.Parted Live 24.03, answering questions about the xz exploit, Linux Mint to ship HWE kernel, AlmaLinux patches flaw ahead of upstream Red Hat, Calculate changes release model |
| • Issue 1064 (2024-04-01): NixOS 23.11, the status of Hurd, liblzma compromised upstream, FreeBSD Foundation focuses on improving wireless networking, Ubuntu Pro offers 12 years of support |
| • Issue 1063 (2024-03-25): Redcore Linux 2401, how slowly can a rolling release update, Debian starts new Project Leader election, Red Hat creating new NVIDIA driver, Snap store hit with more malware |
| • Issue 1062 (2024-03-18): KDE neon 20240304, changing file permissions, Canonical turns 20, Pop!_OS creates new software centre, openSUSE packages Plasma 6 |
| • Issue 1061 (2024-03-11): Using a PinePhone as a workstation, restarting background services on a schedule, NixBSD ports Nix to FreeBSD, Fedora packaging COSMIC, postmarketOS to adopt systemd, Linux Mint replacing HexChat |
| • Issue 1060 (2024-03-04): AV Linux MX-23.1, bootstrapping a network connection, key OpenBSD features, Qubes certifies new hardware, LXQt and Plasma migrate to Qt 6 |
| • Issue 1059 (2024-02-26): Warp Terminal, navigating manual pages, malware found in the Snap store, Red Hat considering CPU requirement update, UBports organizes ongoing work |
| • Issue 1058 (2024-02-19): Drauger OS 7.6, how much disk space to allocate, System76 prepares to launch COSMIC desktop, UBports changes its version scheme, TrueNAS to offer faster deduplication |
| • Issue 1057 (2024-02-12): Adelie Linux 1.0 Beta, rolling release vs fixed for a smoother experience, Debian working on 2038 bug, elementary OS to split applications from base system updates, Fedora announces Atomic Desktops |
| • Issue 1056 (2024-02-05): wattOS R13, the various write speeds of ISO writing tools, DSL returns, Mint faces Wayland challenges, HardenedBSD blocks foreign USB devices, Gentoo publishes new repository, Linux distros patch glibc flaw |
| • Issue 1055 (2024-01-29): CNIX OS 231204, distributions patching packages the most, Gentoo team presents ongoing work, UBports introduces connectivity and battery improvements, interview with Haiku developer |
| • Issue 1054 (2024-01-22): Solus 4.5, comparing dd and cp when writing ISO files, openSUSE plans new major Leap version, XeroLinux shutting down, HardenedBSD changes its build schedule |
| • Issue 1053 (2024-01-15): Linux AI voice assistants, some distributions running hotter than others, UBports talks about coming changes, Qubes certifies StarBook laptops, Asahi Linux improves energy savings |
| • Issue 1052 (2024-01-08): OpenMandriva Lx 5.0, keeping shell commands running when theterminal closes, Mint upgrades Edge kernel, Vanilla OS plans big changes, Canonical working to make Snap more cross-platform |
| • Issue 1051 (2024-01-01): Favourite distros of 2023, reloading shell settings, Asahi Linux releases Fedora remix, Gentoo offers binary packages, openSUSE provides full disk encryption |
| • Issue 1050 (2023-12-18): rlxos 2023.11, renaming files and opening terminal windows in specific directories, TrueNAS publishes ZFS fixes, Debian publishes delayed install media, Haiku polishes desktop experience |
| • Issue 1049 (2023-12-11): Lernstick 12, alternatives to WINE, openSUSE updates its branding, Mint unveils new features, Lubuntu team plans for 24.04 |
| • Issue 1048 (2023-12-04): openSUSE MicroOS, the transition from X11 to Wayland, Red Hat phasing out X11 packages, UBports making mobile development easier |
| • Issue 1047 (2023-11-27): GhostBSD 23.10.1, Why Linux uses swap when memory is free, Ubuntu Budgie may benefit from Wayland work in Xfce, early issues with FreeBSD 14.0 |
| • Issue 1046 (2023-11-20): Slackel 7.7 "Openbox", restricting CPU usage, Haiku improves font handling and software centre performance, Canonical launches MicroCloud |
| • Issue 1045 (2023-11-13): Fedora 39, how to trust software packages, ReactOS booting with UEFI, elementary OS plans to default to Wayland, Mir gaining ability to split work across video cards |
| • Issue 1044 (2023-11-06): Porteus 5.01, disabling IPv6, applications unique to a Linux distro, Linux merges bcachefs, OpenELA makes source packages available |
| • Issue 1043 (2023-10-30): Murena Two with privacy switches, where old files go when packages are updated, UBports on Volla phones, Mint testing Cinnamon on Wayland, Peppermint releases ARM build |
| • Issue 1042 (2023-10-23): Ubuntu Cinnamon compared with Linux Mint, extending battery life on Linux, Debian resumes /usr merge, Canonical publishes fixed install media |
| • Issue 1041 (2023-10-16): FydeOS 17.0, Dr.Parted 23.09, changing UIDs, Fedora partners with Slimbook, GNOME phasing out X11 sessions, Ubuntu revokes 23.10 install media |
| • Issue 1040 (2023-10-09): CROWZ 5.0, changing the location of default directories, Linux Mint updates its Edge edition, Murena crowdfunding new privacy phone, Debian publishes new install media |
| • Issue 1039 (2023-10-02): Zenwalk Current, finding the duration of media files, Peppermint OS tries out new edition, COSMIC gains new features, Canonical reports on security incident in Snap store |
| • Issue 1038 (2023-09-25): Mageia 9, trouble-shooting launchers, running desktop Linux in the cloud, New documentation for Nix, Linux phasing out ReiserFS, GNU celebrates 40 years |
| • Issue 1037 (2023-09-18): Bodhi Linux 7.0.0, finding specific distros and unified package managemnt, Zevenet replaced by two new forks, openSUSE introduces Slowroll branch, Fedora considering dropping Plasma X11 session |
| • Issue 1036 (2023-09-11): SDesk 2023.08.12, hiding command line passwords, openSUSE shares contributor survery results, Ubuntu plans seamless disk encryption, GNOME 45 to break extension compatibility |
| • Issue 1035 (2023-09-04): Debian GNU/Hurd 2023, PCLinuxOS 2023.07, do home users need a firewall, AlmaLinux introduces new repositories, Rocky Linux commits to RHEL compatibility, NetBSD machine runs unattended for nine years, Armbian runs wallpaper contest |
| • Issue 1034 (2023-08-28): Void 20230628, types of memory usage, FreeBSD receives port of Linux NVIDIA driver, Fedora plans improved theme handling for Qt applications, Canonical's plans for Ubuntu |
| • Full list of all issues |
| Star Labs |
Star Labs - Laptops built for Linux.
View our range including the highly anticipated StarFighter. Available with coreboot open-source firmware and a choice of Ubuntu, elementary, Manjaro and more. Visit Star Labs for information, to buy and get support.
|
| Random Distribution | 
Nexenta OS
Nexenta OS was a free and open source operating system combining the OpenSolaris kernel with GNU application userland. Nexenta OS runs on Intel/AMD 32-/64-bit hardware and was distributed as a single installable CD. Upgrades and binary packages not included on the CD can be installed from Nexenta OS repository using Advanced Packaging Tool. In addition, source based software components can be downloaded from network repositories available at Debian/GNU Linux and Ubuntu Linux.
Status: Discontinued
|
| TUXEDO |
TUXEDO Computers - Linux Hardware in a tailor made suite
Choose from a wide range of laptops and PCs in various sizes and shapes at TUXEDOComputers.com. Every machine comes pre-installed and ready-to-run with Linux. Full 24 months of warranty and lifetime support included!
Learn more about our full service package and all benefits from buying at TUXEDO.
|
| Star Labs |
Star Labs - Laptops built for Linux.
View our range including the highly anticipated StarFighter. Available with coreboot open-source firmware and a choice of Ubuntu, elementary, Manjaro and more. Visit Star Labs for information, to buy and get support.
|
|
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
0x969CD4E778C7b6549A2B00e34114e0168c86A542 
