Hello everyone! I would like to know why there seems to be some dislike toward Ubuntu within the Linux community. I would like you to share your reasons for why you like Ubuntu or, on the contrary, why you don’t. Thanks 🙇

  • Radioactive Butthole@reddthat.comEnglish
    2·
    20 days ago

    I don’t really have any experience with enterprise Ubuntu (we use RHEL at work and I’m not a sysadmin anyway) but its kind of hard to blame that all on Canonical since they inherited it from debian.

    I mean, I’m sure you could change the package format that your nascent distro uses, but at that point you might as well make a completely new, unforked distro since you’re basically rewriting the entire system.

      • Radioactive Butthole@reddthat.comEnglish
        3·
        19 days ago

        There’s lots of examples. Mir, Unity, Snap, PPAs, and more.

        I think Ubuntu Core is a bad example. Immutable distros is where the industry is headed for a lot of good reasons, and it makes sense for Canonical to jump on that train. Snaps are bad (although honestly I do like that they can package server apps unlike flatpak, that’s cool), but the concept for the distro is not.

          • Radioactive Butthole@reddthat.comEnglish
            2·
            18 days ago

            The selling point is that it is immutable, not that it uses snaps (which it does). Fedora does the same thing with Silverblue and IoT. You don’t install rpms, you install flatpaks. You can install rpms, but you’re not really meant to.

            Since Canonical refuses to get onboard with flatpak (for now) they use snaps instead of debs, but snaps aren’t the direct appeal.

            The whole idea is that you have a core system in a known configuration. Updating the system just means using a different image. If an update fails, then you just roll back to the last good configuration. Bazzite uses this to nice effect too.

            There are a lot of advantages to end users and enterprise admins with systems in this configuration.