Re: [dev] Linux distros that don't suck too too much

From: hiro <>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 02:33:41 +0200

let's maintain a list of of requirements a distro should fulfill.
perhaps we can make a nice table afterwards and see which OS fits
these requirements out of the box.
i'll start with this. convince me otherwise.

1. package system: packages having few, sane dependencies (early
tinycorelinux was excellent in this regard)
2. init system: some fucking scripts obviously
3. no fucking networkmanager, no fucking wicd. instead just
wpa_supplicant (possibly wpa_gui) and udhcpc (udhcpc can run a script
when it gets a lease)
4. no fucking complicated powersaving scripts (laptop tools, s2ram and
such shit) for old shitty CPUs that are inefficient anyway
(speedstep), it's the kernel's job to save power, simplicity over
5. man pages exist and work (fuck you tinycorelinux)
6. no stupid sound system, OSS3 or alsa is enough (yay tinycorelinux)
7. usable browser is installed and updated (firefox is failing too
much, it's too slow on my old computer, seems like webkit is the new
IE anyway: chrome for me, perhaps surf for you nerds) (tinycorelinux
has built their own BUGGY webkit browser: fifth, sadly doesn't have a
recent chromium)
8. fucking videos in the browser will always open in the video player
(no fucking embedded window) (fifth browser does this well)
9. hip applications have to run out of the box: skype, chrome, gimp,
openoffice, mplayer, openssh, rsync, irssi, mutt, qmail, gparted,
ntfs-3g, sbase/9base, (some file manager? i have no idea about such),
what else?
10. try to support useful additional features like video acceleration
as automatically (when running suggested packages (e.g. i
maintain mplayer-g45-alsa.tcz in tinycorelinux for my thinkpad x200
and use it instead of mplayer.tcz)
11. install should take less than 5 minutes and must include all
packages i mentioned above already. (tinycorelinux install takes mere
seconds, but doesn't come with enough useful packages for desktops by
install doesn't ask stupid fucking retarded questions like:
12. hostname: just use some neutral default. i can modify this later
if needed, when i have actual time for such bullshit. (tinycore yay)
13. dhcp/static If there's a lan port and it has a link TRY DHCP,
don't even fucking dare to ask about such shit. only ask me stupid
questions about setting up static ip when the sane default obviously
doesn't work (e.g. still no lease at the end of install). (tinycore
14. username, just use the default name (e.g. fucksudo, optionally
something more corporate) and let it get root via sudoers without
password (because sadly root is broken by stupid people trying to
nanny us about not running their shitty apps as root) (tinycore yay)
15. password: don't ask me for a fucking password, just log me in to
something that has superuser privileges. IM SITTING IN FRONT ANYWAY. I
know how to run the passwd tool or set up my .ssh dir myself.
(tinycore yay)
16. instead of asking what packages to install just make it part of
the download process: list the packages that are included in each
rootfs. maintain by editing the list of packages and then running a
script that will use this to generate the rootfs. (fuck you tinycore)
17. shell: dash or so
18. text editors: ed, perhaps vi

On 5/12/16, Louis Santillan <> wrote:
> There's also CRUX [0] and tinycorelinux [1]. CRUX has more of a
> BSD-style init system feel. There's also a CruxEX [2] which includes
> a DE. However, I need to spin up a VM of AlpineLinux and see what
> it's all about.
> [0]
> [1]
> [2]
> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 3:26 PM, Marc Collin <>
> wrote:
>> Arch Linux was suckless maybe in 2008. Today it's messy, confused and
>> bloated.
>> For once, it was one of the first distributions to embrace Systemd.
>> I think these emails about "what's a suckless distribution" are always
>> bad, but I'll give my advice (research is on you).
>> From most usable to least usable (as of today)
>> --- Alpine Linux
>> --- OpenBSD
>> --- 9front
>> --- stali
>> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Calvin Morrison <>
>> wrote:
>>> On 11 May 2016 at 06:56, Nick <> wrote:
>>>> Hi folks,
>>>> A few nights ago my too-expensive laptop met with too-cheap wine and
>>>> now
>>>> it is a far-too-expensive brick. As it's therefore time for me to
>>>> install a new OS on a new laptop, I was wondering what people would
>>>> recommend. I've been using Debian Stable for years now, which while it
>>>> sucks does work well enough that I don't have to think about it very
>>>> much, so I can do more interesting things with my time. But
>>>> particularly
>>>> after reading a few good articles about issues with debian [0] [1] I
>>>> find myself wondering if there's a better option out there. A rolling
>>>> release distribution would be fine with me, but only if it didn't break
>>>> often at all; I enjoyed using Gentoo years ago when I was a student,
>>>> but
>>>> keeping it working took a lot of time that I do not want to dedicate to
>>>> keeping a working system these days. I'd like to try something like
>>>> morpheus [2], but I suspect that would take quite a lot of time and
>>>> energy to get going and maintain.
>>>> Any suggestions / thoughts?
>>> I highly recommend archlinux. The biggest benefit is the no-bullshit
>>> packaging. They don't patch, they don't fix software, they simply
>>> package it. If something is a problem, take it up with the software
>>> developers, not the packagers. Compare that to debian who patches very
>>> many packages.
Received on Thu May 12 2016 - 02:33:41 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu May 12 2016 - 02:36:10 CEST