I’m your regular end user. I use my computers to edit text, audio and video, watch movies, listen to music, post and bank on the internet…

my main computer uses now debian 12.5 after abandoning xubuntu.

For my backup notebook I have several candidates:

  • Simply install debian 12.5 again, the easiest choice.

  • Install linux mint, so I get ubuntu but without them throwing their subscription services down my throat. I’m unsure about other advantages, as ubuntu is debian based, maybe the more frequent program updates? Kernels are also updated more often than with debian as far as I know. Do you know of other advantages?

  • Go for FreeBSD: this might require a learning curve, because this is an OS I’ve never used. Are commands that different from debian?

other more niche linux OSs seem too much a hassle and I guess won’t be as supported as the main ones.

  • kbal@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    6 months ago

    Um… Debian? I may be biased, but sometimes I think half the “which distro” questions I see are specifically designed to get me to say Debian. It’s unclear why you think that more frequent updates would be an advantage.

    • LeFantome@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      More up-to-date packages can be an advantage. One, they may have features you need. Two, there may be compatibility issues. This is especially true of dev tools and the graphics stack. The packages in Debian Stable are not that old yet but they will be.

    • merompetehla@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’s unclear why you think that more frequent updates would be an advantage.

      kernels: I forgot the command to compare both but ubuntu/canonical releases kernel upgrades more often than debian. To a newbie like me this means ubuntu/canonical reacts to security flaws and fixes stability bugs that get discovered faster than debian. Updated hardware support is also a plus.

      • comicallycluttered@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Kernels shouldn’t be a problem if you have the backports repo enabled (you can enable it during install, otherwise add it to your sources.list).

        You do first have to specify that you want the kernel from backports (or set up APT pinning preferences), but after that, it’ll keep that specific package updated whenever you run sudo apt upgrade and there’s a newer version.

        If you installed the generic Linux image on installation (usually the default, I believe), the quick way to upgrade is basically just:

        sudo apt install -t bookworm-backports linux-image-amd64

        It should be noted that backports is not Sid or Testing, it’s stuff built specifically for current Stable that people might need newer versions of for various reasons (e.g. hardware, limited feature updates that don’t affect the base system, some development libraries, etc.), so it’s quite small in the amount of unique packages it has. Like, you can get newer LibreOffice packages, but you’re not going to get Plasma 6 or whatever.

        Right now, the kernel is on 6.7 in backports, while Stable is on 6.1 and Sid is on 6.8. So you’ll get them a tiny bit later, but that’s in terms of days/weeks, rather than, you know, the usual two-ish years (not counting security updates).

        Side note: if you want all this enabled by default, Spiral Linux is just straight up Debian Stable with a bunch of firmware packages preinstalled for easier installation on a variety of hardware and the kernel is updated via backports by default, so you could give that a shot as well.

        It’s not like “a distro based on Debian”, it is Debian, but set up with conveniences for modern desktop users and also sets up btrfs + apt snapshotting by default, similar to OpenSUSE Tumbleweed’s process.

  • KISSmyOSFeddit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Don’t use FreeBSD on a notebook.
    Unless you can live without energy management, suspend, bluetooth, function keys and usable wifi speeds out of the box.

    Is there any reason not to use Debian when you’re already happy with it on your main rig?

  • Fecundpossum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    6 months ago

    I would recommend Linux Mint. Yes it’s faster to update than Debian, but it doesn’t push the envelope nearly as fast as Fedora or Arch based distros.

    Linux mint is just super easy, user friendly, you could use Mint without ever touching a terminal if you wanted. BSD would be a great pet project to fiddle with, but if you’re looking for a rock solid backup machine with zero fuss, Mint is perfect for that.

  • hyperobject@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    6 months ago

    is there anything which actually bothers you about Debian? what impedes your workflow? what edge cases with hardware and updating affect you?

    is there really a reason to switch? do you care about unburdening developers from dealing with systemD?

      • hyperobject@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        That’s valid. I want to know the reasons why people go to the lengths they do with some distros. I have just settled in.

  • biribiri11@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Go for FreeBSD: this might require a learning curve, because this is an OS I’ve never used. Are commands that different from debian?

    Both of them are, at the very least, unix-like, so the core command set is mostly the same, albeit with sometimes large functional differences.

    Simply install debian 12.5 again, the easiest choice.

    You are familiar with Debian. This is probably the choice I’d go with.

    Kernels are also updated more often than with debian as far as I know.

    That’s why Debian has backports.

  • c10l@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 months ago

    Not much use to go Ubuntu or Mint, unless you have specific issues with Debian that don’t happen with those. Even then, it may be one apt install away from a fix.

    If you want to try out BSD, power to you. I wouldn’t experiment on a backup computer though, unless by backup you just mean you want to have the spare hardware and will format it with Debian if you ever need to make it your main computer anyway.

    Otherwise, just run Debian!

  • narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 months ago

    If by backup notebook you mean a notebook that you use in case your main notebook breaks or something similar, I’d install the same OS and software on it.

    If by backup notebook you mean that you want to use it as a server where you store backups on, I’d use either Debian or AlmaLinux.

  • BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Unless you’re specifically wanting to play with a different OS then Debian again. Makes much more sense to be using the same version of Linux and all the software ypu use rather than potentially different versions.

    Also it will be simpler to maintain as everything is the same.

    If you do want to play / test another distro then Mint has a low learning curve. FreeBSD is more different but you could easily try it and switch to something else if you don’t like it. Its different but not so much that linux users would feel totally lost.

    Probably the most confusing thing for linux user trying FreeBSD is that Bash is not installed, and BSD uses sh instead by default. Bash can be easily installed and set as the default shell which will give a lot more familiarity. But otherwise it’ll feel like a familiar modern complete system, and you can use the same desktop environments you’re familiar with already in linux.

    EDIT: You did say “backup” in your title. If that’s the main use case then definitely Debian again. If your laptop breaks or is stolen it makes sense to have a familiar system to pick up. Also important to sync and backup your data so it can be picked up on the other laptop. If backup machine is your focus then I’d say same OS and look more into data retention and retrieval between the two laptops, and ensure your important data is continuously backed up.

  • banazir@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    If you want Debian with more frequent updates, consider going Debian sid. Base Debian is also fine, maybe with Flatpaks for more up-to-date applications where needed.

    • 乇ㄥ乇¢ㄒ尺ㄖ@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      From your experience is it really unstable ( annoyingly buggy ), or do they just call it that and it stable really ?

      Sid exclusively gets security updates through its package maintainers. The Debian Security Team only maintains security updates for the current “stable” release.

      Is this a good thing ?

      • c10l@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        The main “instability” I’ve found with testing or sid is just that because new packages are added quickly, sometimes you’ll have dependency clashes.

        Pretty much every time the package manager will take care of keeping things sane and not upgrading a package that will cause any incompatibility.

        The main issue is if at some point you decide to install something that has conflicting dependencies with something you already have installed. Those are usually solvable with a little aptitude-fu as long as there are versions available to sort things out neatly.

        A better first step to newer packages is probably stable with backports though.

        https://backports.debian.org/

      • ik5pvx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        It is very usable, provided you pay attention to major upcoming changes. To give you a very recent example, during May they switched the time libraries to use 64 bits, and like others said, it was dependency hell until the tide of all the packages being recompiled passed. In those cases, unless you know EXACTLY what to do, it’s better to wait for updates to come in, let apt sort out what could be updated and what had to wait, and just make sure it doesn’t propose you to delete things. After 2 weeks it was all business as usual. Side note: aptitude (my package manager of choice) was unusable, while apt threaded on and pulled me out of the tangle.

      • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        I used unstable for years (don’t anymore). It broke itself in minor and major ways every couple of months. Maybe it wouldn’t boot or X wouldn’t start, or the package dependencies were broken and I couldn’t install certain packages for a couple of days. Stuff like that.

        You will have manually to fix these things from time to time, or do a workaround (like manually downgrading certain packages), or wait a week so stuff gets sorted. Most of the time it works fine though. I imagine the experience is somewhat similar to running arch.

        You do not get security fixes, but it’s not a massive problem usually, since you’ll get the newest version of most software after a couple of days (occasionally longer) after it is released.

        Anyway do not recommend unless you want to be a beta tester. I did report bugs sometimes, but almost always by the time I encountered an issue, it was already reported and a fix was already in the works.

          • jcarax@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            Same here. I feel like Sid is there to catch problems, so devs and maintainers use it as such. Arch aims to be stable, though obviously not to the degree of Debian Stable, and so devs and maintainers aim for that. If one wants the Arch equivalent to Sid, there’s the testing repo, but there’s much less of a delta between stable and testing in Arch, so there isn’t much point unless you actually want to help test.

  • Falken@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    6 months ago

    The specific distro doesn’t really matter. What matters is package choice (being able to do the few things you listed with the apps you would like to use). I guess if you’re among the Debian evangelists you probably value stability more than any other consideration. Just pick some server distro or Debian again.

  • Eugenia@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    6 months ago

    I’d go with Linux Mint Edge Edition (not the default Mint). Better support for hardware than either plain Mint, or Debian, and more optimizations for laptops and battery (ubuntu might be hated, but they have lots of kernel patches). Also, for some weird reason, Mint with Cinnamon uses less RAM than Debian with Cinnamon. Also, easier support for third party non-free drivers.

    I love BSD, but I wouldn’t want it on a laptop. They’re just not optimized for such usage with batteries etc.

    • merompetehla@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Linux Mint Edge Edition

      is Edge a desktop environment or a system that lets you use other DEs later? I’m partial to xfce.

      I thought every DE gets the same kernel patches.

      • Chris L@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Edge has a much new kernel. The last time I checked, regular Mint was using a 5x kernel, and Edge had, if I remember correctly, a 6.5 kernel.

      • Eugenia@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Edge is Cinnamon with a newer kernel. So, since you like XFce, try install the XFce version of Mint, and see if it works with your system. If it mostly works and boots, but not completely, you can always install the newer kernel found on Edge using the Update app (there’s a menu option to install newer kernels after installation). But if it doesn’t install/boot, but you’re confident that Linux should support your laptop, then consider the Edge version with Cinnamon.

  • LeFantome@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 months ago

    You should give FreeBSD a shot sometime but it is probably not the best choice for a laptop honestly. If you do want to try it, maybe give one of the desktop FreeBSD distros like GhostBSD a try.

    If you already like Debian, why not stick with that? If you want to try Mint, maybe Debian Edition ( LMDE ) would be a nice compromise.

  • 0xtero@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 months ago

    The obvious recommendation is Gentoo stage1 tarball running in Windows Linux Subsystem.

    (on a serious note: whatever you’re running on your daily driver)