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   ( @kbal@fedia.io ) 
    21•15 days 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.

    •  merompetehla   ( @merompetehla@lemmy.ml ) OPEnglish
      2•14 days 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   ( @comicallycluttered@beehaw.org ) 
        4•14 days 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.

    •  LeFantome   ( @LeFantome@programming.dev ) 
      2•15 days 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.

  •  hyperobject   ( @hyperobject@lemmy.ml ) 
    11•15 days 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?

  •  biribiri11   ( @biribiri11@lemmy.ml ) 
    9•15 days 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.

  •  narc0tic_bird   ( @narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee ) 
    7•16 days 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.

  •  LeFantome   ( @LeFantome@programming.dev ) 
    6•15 days 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.

  •  Falken   ( @leecalvin@lemmy.ca ) 
    6•14 days 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.

      •  gnuhaut   ( @gnuhaut@lemmy.ml ) 
        2•16 days 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.

  •  lemmyreader   ( @lemmyreader@lemmy.ml ) English
    4•16 days ago

    Simply install debian 12.5 again, the easiest choice.

    Good 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?

    There’s LMDE, Linux Mint Debian version.

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

    Yes, commands are different (For example ifconfig and not ip. And watch on Linux is something different on FreeBSD) and you can expect several things to not work out of the box. Also, mounting removable devices is different. Documentation is very good though unless your reached a niche problem. I’d suggest to first toy around with FreeBSD in a VM (Qemu or VirtualBox) if you want to sneak preview it and learn more.

  •  Eugenia   ( @eugenia@lemmy.ml ) English
    4•15 days 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.

      •  Eugenia   ( @eugenia@lemmy.ml ) English
        1•14 days 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.