Those who don’t have the time or appetite to tweak/modify/troubleshoot their computers: What is your setup for a reliable and low-maintenance system?
Context:
I switched to Linux a couple of years ago (Debian 11/12). It took me a little while to learn new software and get things set up how I wanted, which I did and was fine.
I’ve had to replace my laptop though and install a distro (Fedora 41) with a newer kernel to make it work but even so, have had to fix a number of issues. This has also coincided with me having a lot less free time and being less interested in crafting my system and more interested in using it efficiently for tasks and creativity. I believe Debian 13 will have a new enough kernel to support my hardware out of the box and although it will still be a hassle for me to reinstall my OS again, I like the idea of getting it over with, starting again with something thoroughly tested and then not having to really touch anything for a couple of years. I don’t need the latest software at all times.
I know there are others here who have similar priorities, whether due to time constraints, age etc.
Do you have any other recommendations?
- yet another vote for Debian Stable
- second the comment on: if you need a newer kernel for hardware reasons, use backports
- Xfce
- stick to flatpaks when dealing with wanting to try out a new program (if you like it, then make the decision to use apt or not)
- don’t confuse “hasn’t been updated” with “hasn’t needed to be updated”
Running exotic niche server images out in the wild…
It’s just Fedora CoreOS with some QoL packages added at build time. Not niche at all. The very minor changes made are all transparent on GitHub.
Choose CoreOS if you prefer, it’s equally zero maintenance.
Yeah, sure. I was running Bluefin-DX. One day image maintainers decided to replace something and things break. UBlue is an amazing project. Team is trying hard but it’s definitely not zero mainainace. I fear they are chasing so many UBlue flavours, recently an LTS one based on CoreOS, spreading thin.
If you depend on third party modules you’ll end up with third party maintenance - we didn’t purposely decide to break this we don’t work at Nvidia.
Jorge, OP asked about “not having to really touch anything for a couple of years”. I am just sharing my experience. Big fan of containers and really appreciate your efforts of pulling containers tech into Linux desktop. Thank you!
I don’t understand the answer though. Maybe I am missing something here. There’s an official Bluefin-DX-Nvidia iso. Nvidia-containers-toolkit was part of that iso.
On a separate note, I liked the idea of GTS edition. Since few weeks ago iso became unavailable pending some fix. At the same time I see loads of new LTS edition buzz. It’s still in Alpha though. I feel confused.
I don’t understand the answer though.
The answer is if you’re depending on software that is closed and out of your control (aka. you have an Nvidia card) then you should have support expectations around that hardware and linux.
There are no GTS ISOs because we don’t have a reliable way to make ISOs (the ones we have now are workarounds) but that should be finished soon.
Thanks for clarifying, Jorge. I wish I lived in a perfect world where all hardware and software follow FOSS principles. Until then I will have to rely on the other distros that embrace an imperfect reality. I cannot reconcile how Bluefin targets developers and NVidia, unfortunately is not something many of those developers can afford to ignore. Good luck with your project!
I cannot reconcile
It’s like a saving throw in a video game, most times you can make it, but every once in a while you don’t lol.
🤷 I’ve been running Aurora and uCore for over a year and have yet to do any maintenance.
You can roll back to the previous working build by simply restarting, it’s pretty much the easiest fix ever and still zero maintenance (since you didn’t have to reconfigure or troubleshoot anything, just restart).
deleted by creator
I second Mint. I’ve installed it on my laptop with zero issues, although that thing is pretty old so your mileage may vary on newer hardware. But mint comes with pretty up to date kernels these days so it’s definitely worth a try.
Same here. I got to a point I wanted to use the OS rather than play with and fix it. Went back to Mint and stayed there.
Every time I stray from Mint I am reminded why I go back to it.
If you like debian and just need a newer kernel you could just add backports to your debian install then install the kernel during the install process.
Debian stable + XFCE for me. Missing newer packages though. I’m interested in what problems you had with Fedora
I had problems with waking from sleep/hibernate, audio issues (total dropouts as well as distortion in screen-recording apps), choppy video playback and refusal to enter fullscreen, wonky cursor scaling, apps not working as expected or not running at all. I’ve managed to fix most of these or find temporary workarounds (grateful for flatpaks for once!) or alternative applications. But the experience was not fun, particularly as there was only a 2 week return window for the laptop and I needed to be sure the problems weren’t hardware design/choice related. And I’m finding it 50/50 whether an app actually works when I install it from the repo. There’s a lot less documentation for manually installing things as well and DNF is slow compared to apt…
I don’t want to say for certain that Fedora as a distro is to blame but I suspect that it is. I miss my Debian days.
I had problems with waking from sleep/hibernate
what graphics do you have? Don’t expect that to go away with nvidia. no such issues on AMD though, intel should be fine though
Intel Arc integrated graphics.
Let’s hope Debian fits you. I had to change to an Intel WiFi card but everything else worked OOTB for me on my laptop
This! Debian with Gnome or others is the answer. Take an afternoon to make it yours, then forget it. You can use backported kernels on Debian, to support newer hardware. Try this or upgrade to Debian 13 right now by changing the sourcefile to trixie instead of bookworm. Note : if you use Gnome, let gnome-software handle the updates for you (there’s an equivalent for kde). If you use others, configure unattented-upgrades for automatic updates.
fedora has been this for myself. maybe tweaking every now and then to fix whatever edge cases I’ve run into but it’s the least painful distro I’ve used so far
Debian XFCE or Xubuntu LTS.
xfce is stubbornly slow at introducing new features, but it is absolutely rock-solid. Hell I don’t think they’ve changed their icon set in some 20 years.
Debian and *buntu LTS are also likewise slow feature updaters that focus on stability.
The thing with Debian is that yes, it’s the most stable distro family, but stable != “just works”, especially when talking about a PC and not a server (as a PC is more likely to need additional hardware drivers). Furthermore, when the time comes that you DO want to upgrade Debian to a newer version, it’s one of the more painful distros to do so.
I think fedora is a good compromise there. It’s unstable compared to RHEL, but it’s generally well-vetted and won’t cause a serious headache once every few years like Debian.
What makes Debian 12 a painful distro to upgrade?
I don’t understand that comment either. I’ve been using Debian for years on my server, and it just keeps up with the times (well with Debian times, not necessarily current times).
It’s way easier than Kubuntu was for me, for example, which required reinstalling practically every time I wanted to upgrade. A few times the upgrade actually worked, but most of the time I had to reinstall.
Debian as a server is fine and probably the best ! However as a daily drive OS I don’t think it’s the best choice.
I have always seen Debian as server distro and that’s probably what they meant ?
I have debian as my server distro since the beginning of my Linux journey (NEVER failed me !) However I can’t see how Debian as daily drive is a good idea. Sure they try to catch up with testing repo for those who wan’t a more up to date distro, but it’s seems harder to keep up when something breaks along the way.
That’s where Arch and derivatives shine, if something goes wrong it’s fixed in a few days.
I’ve been daily driving it on my desktop and laptop for several months now, seems fine. But I don’t need the bleeding edge either.
But that’s not what the comment was about… The top level comment said Debian was hard to upgrade, and I have not had that experience.
Specifically upgrading major versions. See the official documentation for upgrading Debian 11 to 12. It’s far more involved than minor version upgrades.
https://www.debian.org/releases/bookworm/amd64/release-notes/ch-upgrading.html
This is what I’ve always done. It has worked fine for me every time.
Even then, there’s a warning that the upgrade process can take several hours. Even if it’s largely hands off, that’s not exactly my image of an easy upgrade.
The problem is when it comes time for a major version upgrade. Debian 12.10.0 to 12.11.0 probably won’t be a big deal. But upgrading from Debian 11 to 12 was a pain. Debian 12 to 13 will probably be a pain as well.
In what way? I haven’t upgraded between major releases on Debian before.
Here’s the official documentation for upgrading from Debian 11 to 12. The TL;DR is that it takes 8 chapters to describe the process.
https://www.debian.org/releases/bookworm/amd64/release-notes/ch-upgrading.html
fedora with gnome for me.
As others have mentioned, Debian stable and Xubuntu are my default recommendations for anyone who wants a simple “just works” kind of system. Debian if they want it to be as clean as possible, Xubuntu if they want some creature comfort right out of the box.
Idem, I default to debian on server and Xubuntu on laptop.
My desktop has been running debian for 5 years no problem including 2 major debian version upgrades, and a new(er) GPU.
I had an old laptop that ran the same debian install for 8 years. All upgrades in place, no reinstalls.
boring, and works. Stable + backports should cover the majority of people with new hardware support needs.
Debian
You’re not going to believe this, but I’ve found Arch is it. My desktop install was in December 2018: Sway with Gnome apps. Save for Gnome rolling dice on every major update, it’s been perfectly boring and dependable.
There are two camps of Arch users:
- Use it despite it breaking on every update, because of AUR and other benefits
- What? Arch breaks?
The fact that you’re even saying such things as “time constraints” or “to learn new software” suggests an attitude to computing shared by about 0.01% of the population. It cannot be re-stressed enough to the (sadly shrinking) bubble that frequents this community: the vast majority of people in the world have never touched a laptop let alone a desktop computer. Literally everything now happens on mobile, where FOSS is vanishingly insignificant, and soon AI is going to add a whole new layer of dystopia. But that is slightly offtopic.
It’s a good question IMO. Choosing software freedom - to the small extent that you still can - should not just be about the freedom to tinker, it should also just be easy.
The answer is Ubuntu or Mint or Fedora.
Peppermint , based on debian (also a devuan flavor). “Everything you need and nothing you don’t”
