83
submitted 1 week ago by Jack_Burton@lemmy.ca to c/linux@lemmy.ml

I've been working and testing to switch my main PC (used for work like audio recording, music, and general multimedia) and have been playing with Ubuntu Studio on my laptop. Loving it so far but I keep seeing people talk about CachyOS, Bazzite, or the new Debian Trixie.

I'm having trouble finding what's really different about all these distros aside from how they look or slight changes in how they do things (I know Ubuntu Studio has a low latency kernel which seems important for what I need to do). Is there a big difference? Like, if I go with Ubuntu Studio am I gonna end up wiping everything and installing CachyOS or Bazzite or something in a month because it's better? Or are all these distros basically the same thing with a different look and feel and as long as I choose one that gets regular updates, it doesn't matter fundamentally?

I'm trying to grasp the Linux concept but being a Windows user my whole life I'm struggling to 'get it'. Instead of trying to understand in the contex of Windows or Mac, is a better comparison Apple/Android? Like iPhones would be similar to both Mac and Windows (you don't get to choose much) and Android would be Linux (I know it's built on it haha) and it's really just a bunch of different options to do the same thing?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Kongar@lemmy.dbzer0.com 67 points 1 week ago

I’ve said it here before and I’ll continue to say it. All the Linux nerds (myself included) have strong opinions when it comes to distros or x vs Wayland, or flatpak vs repositories, blah blah blah.

But in the end - none of it matters. You could randomly eliminate all options except for one distro - and we’d happily pick that over windows. The trick is that you could make any distro like any other - it’s just that the distro did all the work for you. So pick the one that matches how you want to use your pc.

Maybe the only thing that’s not changeable is the philosophy behind the distro. Debian - older stuff for stability. Arch - bleeding edge rolling release. Fedora somewhere in the middle. You get the idea.

[-] edel@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 week ago

"Debian - older stuff for stability. Arch - bleeding edge rolling release. Fedora somewhere in the middle." Very true. I would add that then there are a bunch of others that fill the gaps in between. For instance, Ubuntu makes Debian easier and Mint makes Ubuntu more open and TuxedoOS makes Debian/Ubuntu far more up-to-date. Then, CachyOS makes Arch more easy and gamable while Manjaro tries to make Arch more stable. Fedora is a perfect blend but those those that have a beef against Redhat/IBM (USA), OpenSUSE is a perfect blend too of the philosophies of Debian and Arch.

[-] seralth@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Arch is also just becoming the standard gaming option.

A lot of gaming communities that are migrating over are flowing to the aur for their community tools.

[-] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago

A lot of gaming communities that are migrating over are flowing to the aur for their community tools.

Wasn't there malware found in the AUR just last week?

For Linux newbs, AUR is the Arch User Repository where anyone can post packages and scripts. It's highly recommended to NOT trust anything on there due to the risk of malware. If you don't use Arch and stick to your distro's application manager you don't have to worry about it

[-] tyler@programming.dev 4 points 1 week ago

For me it mattered. The majority of distros I tested have had audio or graphical issues (or both). Only bazzite and cachyos have worked straight out of the box.

[-] relaymoth@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

For me, Bluefin as been the only flawless distro.

[-] tyler@programming.dev 1 points 1 week ago

Yeah and that’s the problem. It does matter which distro and as a result the experience for a noob is horrendous.

[-] sic_semper_tyrannis@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

I think Fedora KDE is very refined but I stick to Ubuntu bases as there are some little known programs that I use that only have .deb packages unfortunately

[-] LeFantome@programming.dev 3 points 1 week ago
[-] sic_semper_tyrannis@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

I've heard the name but don't know what it is. Some program to run other distros packages?

[-] LeFantome@programming.dev 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Distrobox allows you to run the userland of a different distro in a container, like Docker.

Different than Docker, the container sees your /home and talks to your local display server.

As an example, you can enter an Arch Linux Distrobox on another distro (say Debian) on the command line. You are now in an Arch terminal. You can run pacman for example and install software from the Arch repos or the AUR. If it is GUI software, you can launch it and it shows up as a regular window in your display. And if you want to load or save files, the /home you see is the real one from your host system.

What is cool is that you can run Distrobox-export inside Distrobox to export an application to your host. It will create an entry in the app menu of your host desktop environment (eg. KDE). Once you have done that, you can launch the application anytime and it will just run and appear on your screen like any other application. Except, under the hood, it is really running in a container on top ot the userland of a different distro.

You can think of it like Flatpak but where you can install the apps from a real Linux distro and not just FlatHub.

So you can run Fedora KDE and use an Ubuntu Distrobox to run those missing apps that are keeping you on Ubuntu. Be free.

I mentioned Arch as I often use Distrobox to get access to the AUR on other distros. For example, I use Chimera Linux which uses MUSL instead of Glibc. If there is something that would not run on MUSL, I can just install it via Distrobox instead (which will run that app on Glibc on my otherwise MUSL system).

But you can use whatever Distro you want. I could be installing Fedora packages instead. Or maybe you are forced to use Arch but hate all the up to date packages. You could use Distrobox to install all the Debian ones instead.

You can mix and match if you want. You can use Distrobox for more than one Distro.

Or you can create a Distrobox for a specific purpose. Love Mint but need to develop apps for RHEL? Run RHEL in a Distrobox and do your dev there.

Mostly I use the packages from my distro. But if something is missing, or the version is too old, Distrobox to the rescue.

[-] tyler@programming.dev 2 points 1 week ago

Replying cause I want to know too

[-] sic_semper_tyrannis@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

It appears to be a way of running containers in the terminal with the specific intent to have a certain distro image installed, run a program, and give it permission to interact with your system's home directory with an easy to launch icon. It looks pretty darn handy, I'm going to give it a try this weekend

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiDt4O6UPRw

this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2025
83 points (97.7% liked)

Linux

57274 readers
1034 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS