I’m here to stay.
Discover is only good for flatpaks in EndeavourOS
Also not entirely ;-), for example Plasma Addons and Application Addons from KDE Store can also be managed this way. But overall I guess you are right, as its not recommended to manage (pacman) system packages with Discover. I don’t even know how to set this up, if I wanted to. Half a point goes to you. :p
“KDE Linux” (codenamed “Project Banana”)
The wiki article starts with a banger. I’m already sold.
There is this concept of desktop environments on Linux. It’s basically the GUI and lot of associated applications. Archlinux does not have one and starts with a terminal and you have to enter commands and know which GUI you want, and set it up yourself. You can install the same that is used in Kubuntu, it’s called KDE Plasma. You can install KDE Plasma on most distributions, its part of what makes Linux customizable. But if you do so, you have to set it up, therefore I highly recommend a distribution like Kubuntu that has it already.
EndeavourOS in example has in the graphical installer the choice what you want to install, and one of them is KDE Plasma. So you would have Archlinux with an easy installer and configuration, with the GUI and toolset of Kubuntu.
But don’t be fooled. While EndeavourOS (and most other Arch based systems) is really good, it still is Arch under the hood. Which means a rolling release and a little bit more risky on updates, because of the constant updates and the newest versions. In case of a problem, you have to hunt it down, and understand what is happening and then solve it. That’s why I do not recommend casual desktop users who are new to Linux and want an easy and uncomplicated usage, not to use an Arch based system. Unless you want deep knowledge and are prepared to do stuff and learn stuff in case of a problem.
This is just a warning, so you know what you are getting into. I love EndeavourOS. But it’s not for everyone.
Agreed. I used Manjaro for 1.5 years and then switched to EndeavourOS. Not sure how long its been, maybe 2 years or so. EndeavourOS is fantastic and its closer to Arch too, but comes with some stuff preinstalled and configured so you don’t need deep knowledge and build your own distribution (unless that is what you want).
I’m thinking of something customizable (Arch)
Most distributions are customizable. The reason why Arch has this reputation of being customizable is, because it comes barebones and you have to build your own distribution out of it, basically. That means you need to learn and understand Linux and how Arch works. With other distributions you can still customize them to lot of degrees, you just start with an already build and tested environment.
However, there is a new trend of so called “immutable” or sometimes also “atomic” distributions. These work a bit differently, where the system is protected and either updated as a whole or in a special way. So deep customization (depending on what you exactly want to do) can vary in those cases. An example of such a distribution would be SteamOS 3.
Then there is also the release model you choose: rolling release or LTS (also known as point release). Archlinux is in example such a rolling release, which means it gets updates and often has the newest software available. But this comes at a risk and often the user need to understand what is happening in case of a problem. Therefore I recommend a beginner to Linux a system that uses a point release system (or also known as LTS in example) instead. Ubuntu uses such a system, and many others. This means it gets security updates and little features over time, but not always the newest version of a software with the newest features. What you get instead is “stability” in the sense of not changing too much and being less risky as well.
If you are new to Linux and want an easy to use distribution that is much Arch, but a little bit easier with preconfigured environment, then I would look at EndeavourOS. But I really do not recommend an Archlinux system as your first distribution, if you want an easy to use system. There are lot of other choices to make too, like the GUI and so on. Looks like you already like KDE Plasma if you want Kubuntu in example. The question is, why are you looking for a different operating system than Kubuntu in example? Why don’t you install Kubuntu. I ask, because the answer could help in finding the right one for you.
I actually don’t have a preference. I usually just use the default locate implementation my distribution provides. I used mlocate before and when the distros switched to plocate, I rolled along with that without making efforts installing mlocate from a different source. Its the easiest and safest way to me. Usage and performance between mlocate and plocate seems to be identical in my experience (no benchmark, just how it “felt”). plocate is actually mlocate with a few patches for edge cases, if I understand it right.
I have it currently uninstalled due to an issue:
However, recently I had some issues with the locate and KDEs baloo (baloo can do content indexing too but I set it to only filename indexing, so its similar to locate). Those tools may have killed my previous system SSD and on my new one I noticed they used up Gigabytes of RAM and seem to be stuck. After investigating both tools seem to have choked on few filenames that contain unusual characters. Therefore I have disabled them for now until figured out how to deal with this (probably renaming) and try later again.
Several distributions made an effort to replace locate with alternative and updated versions of it. For usage the command name is still locate, but the package name should be different, in example mlocate or plocate and there are other alternatives too. The main difference between the old and new versions is they are faster.
I am not a graphics designer, but i have a graphics tablet with such a touch ring. Wanted to use it for some photo editing and this really bugged me in the past. Finally its solved and hopefully the ring can be used to change brush size or zoom in and out in example.
Unless its coded with JavaScript (me mocking the date function). Not that I am a JavaScript programmer, I just happen to know its totally broken.
Could someone explain what’s going on with this comment and why its upvoted so much? It’s a genuine question. What’s wrong with his phone (and how do you know what he uses)?
Dolphin filemanager from KDE. Nowadays I default to “compact” view without “preview” enabled. This is similar to “Icon” view, but the icons are small. Lot of files scrolls horizontal instead vertical.
That’s my default. Occasionally I enable preview image and switch to bigger “icon” view when I look into images or videos. Or sometimes I enable “details” view when needed. In normal usage I don’t need the details anyway.
Yes, I use shellcheck in the editor. Its pretty useful. But running (a little bit more complex commands) in the terminal directly won’t help with shellcheck. That’s why I also have a functionality to directly load and edit the current command in the terminal in (Neo)vim and edit and when closing Vim the command gets executed. The benefit doing this is getting checked by shellcheck in the editor and also it makes it easier to one-off complex commands.
Thanks to shellcheck I got in the habbit to always enclose variables in ${var}. And recently learned from a community member that using [[ expr ]] style has basically no downsides against using [ expr ] directly.
If you want to do a Bash like management and programming, that is not dramatically different but fixes some irritations, then Fish is an alternative. Obviously it will not fix all issues, but there is no paradigm shift in handling streams. nushell is dramatically different and at that point, I would rather use a programming language to do the stuff. Speaking of programming language, there is also Xonsh (basically Python+Bash like combination as a system shell).
All these alternatives have a singular big flaw to me: they are not the standard tools on the system, which defeats the purpose of a system shell to me. In the end, without changing the core system that these shells are built on, I don’t think its possible to make a really well made language that interoperates on system level like a shell does at the moment.
That’s the reason why I got a bit more into Bash to understand some flaws, to understand how to use regexes inside Bash and variable substitutions and a few other concepts that are very useful to know. But man… there are so many traps… like looping over a wildcard for files (such as for file in *.txt) and if the wildcard does not match, then the loop consists of the wildcard as a literal word as if “*.txt” was a filename. What a stupid idea. There is an option to change that, but that’s the issue. The language is filled with traps and optional options and you have to know all of them.
Edit: Added example code why default behavior sucks:
$ for file in *.ABCD; do echo "${file}"; done
*.ABCD
shopt -s nullglob
$ for file in *.ABCD; do echo "${file}"; done
The difference is:
The quoted image does not say so, they do not say the native packaging from your distribution is borderline unusable. That judgement was added by YOU. The devs just state the package on Archlinux is not officially supported, without making a judgement (at least in the quoted image).
As for the Fedora issue, that is a completely different thing. That is also Flatpak, so its not the package format itself the issue. Fedora did package the application in Flatpak their own way and presented it as the official product. That is a complete different issue! That has nothing to do with Archlinux packaging their own native format. Archlinux never said or presented it as the official package either and it does not look like the official Flatpak version.
So where does the developers say that anything that is not their official Flatpak package is “borderline unusable”?
And then there is software like OBS, which is known for being borderline unusable when not using the only officially supported way to use it on Linux outside of Ubuntu – which is Flatpak.
But why is that? I mean just because it is packaged by someone else does not mean its unusable. So its not the package formats issue, but your distribution packaging it wrong. Right? In installed the Flatpak version, because they developers recommended it to me. I’m not sure why the Archlinux package should be unusable (and I don’t want to mess around with it, because I don’t know what part is unusable).
Those mystical average people would probably stay on Windows, if they don’t care or cannot learn basics of other systems. Its really not hard to explain and understand, even for “average person” that there is an universal source for applications and there are packages designed and managed by your operating system. I think its important for people to learn basics and we should teach them, not dumb them down like on Windows. Soon people won’t be able to eat themselves anymore…
Flatpak have their own set of issues. One thing is, that Flatpak applications do not integrate that easily and perfect like a native package. Either rights are to given, you need to know what rights are needed and how to set it up. Theming can be an issue, because it uses its own libraries in the Flatpak eco system instead your current distributions theme and desktop environment.
But on the other hand, they have actually a permission system and are a little bit sandbox compared to normal applications. Packages often are distributed quickly and are up to date directly from the developers, and usually are not installed with root rights.
I’m pretty much a CLI guy as well and prefer native packages (Arch based, plus the AUR). But I also use Flatpaks for various reasons, alongside with AppImages.
If its really important hardware, consider repairing the usb controller.