• toasteecup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wish I could have it as easy as Gort. I miss my debian but I want that ZFS built into my kernel.

        • woelkchen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Over time, Canonical will replace close to everything with Snaps. Ubuntu Remixes are not the solution. They just count towards Ubuntu's installed base and validate Canonical.

          • Drew Belloc@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Honestly i agree, that's why i love that more and more debian based distros are emerging, lot of times from distros that used to be based on ubuntu

            • woelkchen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              that’s why i love that more and more debian based distros are emerging

              How many votes in Debian councils does Canonical own these days? The systemd vs Upstart discussion and vote at Debian was so protracted because Canonical bought votes in Debian's Technological Council.

            • woelkchen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Not access their repositories would be one thing because the only somewhat close approximation of installed base is through repository accesses.

          • spikederailed@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            This is what I fear as well. I'm still running Kubuntu, as I have been for years. Next time I build a system it may just be time for Debian Testing or sid. I've been messing with both on some Intel NUCs I have laying around.

          • Drew Belloc@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Most of them use, unless you pick something like pop os that has it's own kernel packages it will use the default ubuntu kernel

          • Drew Belloc@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Pop os, linux mint, linux lite, etc.

            The first 2 may do a lot pf changes to the base but that's what make them better them ubuntu in my opinion

          • seaQueue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I'd consider Arch too if you're running ZFS on a client machine, there are like 5 kernel packages ready to go in the archzfs repo with ZFS baked in. I got tired of constantly rolling my own updated Debian packages for software a few years ago and made the jump to Arch and I'm really happy with it, the packaging and build system are a joy to work with compared to debs.

            No disrespect intended to Debian here I just got tired of building so many packages to have updated software. EndeavourOS is a good place to start in the Arch ecosystem if you ever feel like checking it out. I run Proxmox on my server boxes as well.

            • toasteecup@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              I used to run arch back before the big /usr/lib migration.

              I forgot what got me to change to debian but a buddy was talking up the rock hard stability and something dumb happened so I made the switch to debian.

              I usually run it as a rolling release (need to point to the version type rather than the codename) in testing. More stable than arch but more recent than stable.

              My big reason for wanting it built into a kernel from my source repo is then I don't have to worry about some bullshit upgrade not actually updating the kernel module like it should have. Dealt with that a few too many times when using ZFS on debian.

              • seaQueue@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                I usually run it as a rolling release (need to point to the version type rather than the codename) in testing. More stable than arch but more recent than stable.

                Yeah, this was me before I got tired of constantly building my own packages to have current versions of some software. I've been pretty content with Arch since I switched to it a few years ago, I still spend some time mucking with packages but nowhere near as much as before. My breaking point with Debian was a new Ryzen laptop a few years ago, I could either package my own kernel for it along with all of the platform software I needed or I could hop over to Arch and just build a patched kernel so I went for it.

                My big reason for wanting it built into a kernel from my source repo is then I don't have to worry about some bullshit upgrade not actually updating the kernel module like it should have. Dealt with that a few too many times when using ZFS on debian.

                There is nothing more annoying than dkms failing to build your primary storage (or NIC) module after a kernel update because ✨reasons✨ - that's a huge part of why I settled on Proxmox for my server boxes, no more unexpected ZFS breakage.

                Check out the Proxmox kernel when you get a chance, you might be able to just pull packages from their repo and roll with Sid otherwise.

                • toasteecup@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Dude if that's the case I'm so stoked. I don't hate Ubuntu but I think forced snaps are dumb and wrongbad. It'll be a bit before I can commit to the project sadly. I've got a work trip, a proposal and some pinball repairs on the docket first.

                  Should probably get a new battery for that laptop too.

          • ikidd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The ZFS installer was removed from later non-LTS releases. AFAIK, even in the version with the ZFS installer, it wasn't in the kernel, it was just including the pre-compiled non-DKMS driver module that matched the kernel version.

            • toasteecup@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              That's inaccurate. I'm was running that kernel when it came out, just the kernel no extra modules or anything get added except the libraries and commanda for ZFS and zpool. I'm on a more recent one these days and it's still the same set up.

              I can't say I care about it being an option in the installer, I'd rather run an advanced install because the installer's ZFS set up was garbage, everything in one zpool, no branching no data encryption etc etc.

    • Empricorn@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The current most popular distribution is MX Linux (based on Debian Stable), which I use. You certainly don't have to, but I would say least start with a distro that respects you and adheres to FOSS standards…

      Edit: context