I would say that Arch is not the best distro to learn the ins and outs of Linux. Arch is comparable to Void in that both are rolling-release distributions and require comfort with the command line.

Gentoo goes a step further by allowing you to tweak CPU-specific and software compile-time options before building packages from source. Then you have PLD Linux, whose installation process demands a strong understanding of the system and its internals.

A step further down is CRUX, which leaves you with the bare essentials - essentially just the kernel. You need to manage repositories yourself to a significant extent.

Finally, we arrive at Linux From Scratch (LFS), which is somewhat similar to CRUX, but with an even more hands-on approach. With LFS, you must manually install virtually everything, including the toolchain, libraries, and basic utilities.

So, from Arch to LFS, there’s still a huge gap in terms of how deeply you engage with the system.

Finally, what does it really mean to “learn Linux”? You can learn Linux with any distro, but when you are using a distro, you are mostly just learning that particular distro.

But the attacking line is also much lower. So? 🤷

This is misleading. While Red Hat contributes significantly to Linux and some open source projects, they did not create the Linux kernel, GCC, or glibc - those are GNU or community projects. You can absolutely use Linux without Red Hat software, especially with distros like Alpine, Gentoo, or Guix. Red Hat is influential, but not essential.

Thanks for the awesome news! I really hope more distros follow that move - more independence means more real freedom.

When exploring the libre distributions recommended by GNU.org or broader FOSS communities, I find myself questioning whether being „blob-free" is truly enough. Some suggested distributions - such as Guix - host their code on GitHub, which is owned by Microsoft.

Similarly, systemd is maintained by Red Hat, a company closely tied to IBM and known to collaborate with Microsoft. It’s used in distributions like Parabola and Trisquel. This raises concerns about centralization and corporate influence, which makes me wonder whether these choices truly align with the spirit of software freedom.

That said, maybe I’m misunderstanding what „libre“ fully entails.

Thank you for mentioning SourceHut as another option - I didn’t know about it. In my opinion, it doesn’t matter whether Void Linux or other distributions choose Forgejo or another platform, as long as they move away from Microsoft-controlled GitHub. Doing so would reduce the risk of corporate influence and give them greater independence, even if I fully understand that it would also mean more work.

Could it be that you’re putting a lot of pressure on yourself, or that the job is causing you a lot of stress? This stress might lead to gastritis, either directly or indirectly through unhealthy eating and drinking habits (eg lot of coffee or coffee of bad quality, fatty food like pizza). If that’s the case, being let go from this company might actually give you the opportunity to find a job with much less stress.

Intel has not learned, still making money on crap chips.

Not only GNU projects, but also entire distributions. Void Linux, for example, is still on GitHub! I hope so much that they will turn to Forjego, Codeberg or Gitea.

You could not be more wrong. It is well alive and still kicking.

Defaults are generally who do not want to understand in depth what they are doing (no offence). Example from other sphere: in R-Cran (used to write statistical models), some functions have defaults to either choose a particular algorithm or an optimisation value. I have heard almost about nobody among students, PhDs and even higher up the ladder, who took the time to understand what is happening below the shell. Instead these people took just the defaults, it worked (result was significant), done. However, if they may have chosen another algorithm, things may have turned differently, which would open up a box with many questions concerning modelling adequacy and understanding of data. It is the same with defaults in Linux.

IMHO the entire voting thing is useless. If you don’t like a post, don’t read it. If the post is aggressive and very harmful (racist, fascist), inform the admin to remove it. If the post is interesting, read it and mark as done. So, why voting? In Reddit and even here on Lemmy, I saw critical comments - which I myself sometimes do not like, but did not downvote - that were heavily downvoted by others (though it was just a critical view). What does this mean? That a user has to play according to the rules of the masses? That he/she cannot express his/her different views? If you don’t like or think a comment is weirded, ask why. Engage the person in a discussion (which may be promoted by the lack of a voting system). Perhaps you can convince him/her, or perhaps the other user can show you a different perspective, which may turn out to be a bit extreme, but not that wrong either. Right?

Can you give 1-2 links, please? Would like to see these guys and what are they saying.

How comes that Vim is proprietary? Jetbrain offers community versions which are afaik open source too, so you can look at the source code, you do not need to pay or agree to an EULA.

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Next please!

Removed by mod

Do not forget that he is thinking about a third term!

Ask if you can join.