I'm using VCSH, which allows me to split the home directory into multiple git repos without worrying about symlink consistency (like with GNU stow) or apps that have problems with symlinks.

The syntax is exactly the same as git, only that I do (for example) vcsh emacs add -p instead of git add -p.

Depending on whether you want a distro that removes all non-free options from the start or one that gives you free options, or ways to only select free options, I'd add Gentoo to that list. Much like in other situations, it gives you the choice to have your cake and eat it too. You can select a list of licenses you want (with certain predefined sets), and override that list on a per-package basis if you want/need.

Here is a Guide/Wiki-Article.

Denmark not only supports it, it's the one country that pushes the hardest for it, and did from the start. Which seems weird from my German perspective, because I wouldn't exactly associate Denmark with a police-state, quite the opposite actually, especially compared to Germany.

You mean 'unnamed' is what's confusing you?

Normally you can do anonymous struct/union members or struct struct/union members that are tagged structs but not anonymous.

I.e. in standard C you'd have to do either:

struct foo { int baz; };
struct bar { struct foo foo; };
...
struct bar data;
data.foo.baz = 0;

or:

struct bar { struct {  int baz; } foo; };
...
struct bar data;
data.baz = 0;

but to do the following, you'd need the extension:

struct foo { int baz; };
struct bar { struct foo; };
...
struct bar data;
data.baz = 0;

I've been using Gentoo since 2008 as my main distro. Some Arch and Ubuntu on the side. Gentoo for me sits right in the middle of Arch's pragmatism and the customizability of something like NixOS/Guix.

Portage on its own is a game changer. And forget about the compiling and ricing, that's not the main benefit, which are:

• USE-flags to manage dependencies and only install what you want with the feature set you want
• downgrading/masking packages at will with dependencies still intact (on other distros this might work for a time, but things will silently or colossally break unexpectedly)
• fully flexible choice between stable and testing versions
• managing config updates via dispatch-conf and getting notified about pending config updates after each operation
• getting news of breaking changes or migrations directly through the package manager via eselect news
• applying custom patches to package automatically by dropping them in a config folder
• using portage bashrc to modify packages on the fly, with hooks for each step of build and installation
• Writing ebuilds and deploying them in an overlay is the most straight forward and easiest way to do custom packages in Linux
• setting up custom portage profiles to share a branching tree of configuration between systems

I also think the philosophy of the devs and maintainers is entirely different than on Arch. Take the difference of the above mentioned news via the package manager to Arch's philosophy of "you'll notice the breaking changes by the system breaking" maximum simplicity at the cost of many more sharp edges for the user. I can't count how many times I had to revisit the /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist, manually reset the keyring, clean up optional dependencies by hand, manually reinstall the AUR-helper etc. While on portage, when it says you're good, you're good. And anything you need to do in addition, it will tell you.

That said, while the system is very maintainable and pragmatically customizable, and with the official binhost, compile-times aren't a big issue anymore, the learning curve certainly is very steep. More than any other distro, Gentoo is what you use when you want to get your hands dirty AND reap the reward in a system that runs like a well oiled machine.

Contrary to what others write*: Yes, the terminal.

It's not that you can't get by without it on many distros, for most things. But for even for medium and non-techy users, getting the fear of the terminal out of the way early will make their journey much, much smoother. It doesn't have to be much, no shell scripting or anything, just the basics, conceptually what a terminal is, what the shell is, how to execute stuff, maybe chmod +x to execute, other utilities like ls, cp, mv, mkdir. maybe symlinks/ln. That'll be enough to take away the fear if they see any "Now do this in the terminal" advice online (which they absolutely will, let's not delude ourselves), and maybe enough to get them to notice that "huh, sometimes the terminal is more convenient, they weren't bullshitting when they said that".

*) Since you asked about "beginner Linux users" and not users that "just want to use their computer and not think about the OS at all", I'm pretty confident about that assertion.

PS: I really think that's not too much too ask. I remember my mother learning DOS commands back in the day for a regular desk-job. Everyone can do this, it's not difficult, people just have to let go of a few false preconceptions drilled into them by the industry (MS, Google and Apple).

How to install video codecs

Is that really still a thing on modern distros? I haven't had to think about that for literally decades (on Gentoo).

Why does it matter to you? If the developers are fine with the license and how the code they write can be used under it, that’s their prerogative.

That's a bit short-sighted. On the level of the individual project you are right, it's the dev's choice. And I think permissive licenses also have a place with security critical software like crypto libraries, where everyone benefits from secure libraries being used as much as possible, even in proprietary software.

But on an ecosystem level, this trend to permissive licensing is very worrying, because if it reaches a critical mass, it opens us up to EEE scenarios. Android is already bad enough, only made bearable by Google having to release much of the source code. Imagine what it would be like today if Google had succeeded with their Fuchsia efforts. So we should at least be wary and give a little pushback to this trend. It's valid to question if everything under the sun has to be rewritten and if it does, why does it have to be permissive licensing? What's the end goal?

I have an Epson EcoTank ET-4850 and it works really well. And even though that's not under $200, cheaper ink might make up for it.

Regardless of the model, what you want is a printer that supports CUPS driverless LAN/WiFi printing and the Apple AirScan protocol for scanning (which the model above supports both). If configured right, CUPS will just detect your printer and it will just work, no installing drivers, no choosing models etc., same with SANE for your scanner, without defining backends.

USB-devices are always a gamble where even minor model-number differences might entirely break support. Better make sure to check on the compatibility list and scour the mailing lists and forums for some crumb of information that your specific and exact printer model is supported and someone verifies it's working. Ideally test before buying, or not rely on USB.

I'm relatively happy with my FP5 at the moment, but the Nokia N900 was the best phone (i.e. the one I was happiest with at the time) I ever had. I might still be using it if the Javascript-infested modern web hadn't tanked its performance. It's also probably the most successful Linux phone of all time.

What I wouldn't give for an N900 with a modern SoC, AMOLED display and 50% larger in exchange for 50% slimmer... I'd even keep the resistive touch plus stylus, screw multi-touch if I could have that back! Desktop apps and desktop versions of websites were entirely usable with the stylus, even on a tiny screen like that. No comparison to my current fat-fingering links even on mobile layouts on huge 5"+ screens. 🤷 Thanks, Steve Jobs.

And the window-management was also brilliant and unsurpassed on any mobile device ever since... And this was at a time when Android didn't have copy-paste yet and could open only one app at a time.

The problem will likely be the warped perception of "low effort" users like you have, that I went in detail on here

This is indicated by phrases like these:

struggle around with all that crap and I need to keep my music shit

Which translate to me as "I don't want to learn or change a thing, so tell me how I change the most fundamental part of my computing without doing that".

As I wrote in the comment linked above, with an attitude like that you'd have a significantly harder time than some non-techy person who just wants to have a system that "just works" without preconceptions, not bother with the technical details, but is entirely open to using new programs and doing things differently, as long as they work reliably.

In your case, I'd say stick to Microsoft until you get your mindset and priorities straight. Because then you'd have an easy time without much tinkering at all. But as it stands I think you'd be setting yourself up for misery and failure.

Nah, it's the same as with systemd, docker, immutable distros etc. Some people just don't appreciate the added complexity for features they don't need/use and prefer to opt out. Then the advocates come, take not using their favorite software as a personal insult and make up straw-men to ridicule and argue against. Then the less enlightened of those opting out will get defensive and let themselves get dragged into the argument. 90% that's the way these flame wars get started and not the other way around.

For the record, I use flatpak on all my desktops, it's great, and all of the other mentioned things in some capacity, but I get why someone might want to not use them. Let's not make software choice a tribalism thing please. Love thy neighbor as thyself, unless they use Windows, in which case, kill the bastard. /s