With Debian you either get something stable (including drivers) or something that's constantly being updated, userland and drivers. Some people do run Debian stable and use backports for things like the kernel, but presumably build Mesa for themselves. Either way you're gonna have to fiddle with it.

Around 10% of GoL users use Manjaro so they are clearing doing something right, and means you can most likely ask others for help here.

Even as a Debian user myself I would suggest Manjaro, at least for starters. You can always try out Debian, stable or unstable, later!

How unstable is Debian unstable? Needs an extra reboot once a year unstable? Or broken packages every now and then unstable?

If snaps are the main reason you're looking for alternatives to Ubuntu, you might want to consider Mint as another option. Based on Ubuntu's LTS releases, no snaps, and all the stability and game compatibility you could hope for. Xanmod kernels and Kisak's Mesa PPA provide the latest stable drivers for me.

Quoting: ShabbyXHow unstable is Debian unstable? Needs an extra reboot once a year unstable? Or broken packages every now and then unstable?

It's primarily unstable as in constantly changing.

Broken packages can be a problem but it's usually that you need to be careful during upgrades and might sometimes have to wait for conflicts to be resolved or fix them yourself.

Problems with the system being unbootable or being in need of a complete reinstall I have never experienced. But that's no guarantee that it can't happen tomorrow.

why Manjaro ...

Never Manjaro.

Your apparent dichotomy from switching from a conservative distro that's easy to get the latest versions of stuff to either extreme of rolling release or super long-term suggests that you really don't know what you want from a distro.

If you want Ubuntu but not snaps because you've heard from Reddit that snaps must be bad, just remove snapd. Or use one of the many Ubuntu derivatives that don't include snapd by default.

In my opinion for choosing a new distro, I'd generally follow the following route:

Decide what you want from a distro:

• How frequently do you want new software versions? The latest software that's potentially unstable or something tried and tested?


• Which packages and software are you likely to need? Which distros include the ability to easily and quickly install those?


• What update method do you want? Do you want to continually update or do you want to stay on a set version with set software for a while?


• Do you need a distribution with easy recovery or rollbacks? Or are you okay to simply re-install? Some distros handle this better than others.


• What security level do you need? Do you need something with only SELinux enabled? Or do you need higher levels of sandboxing?

Once you've whittled down the list of appropriate distributions we move onto the next step:

Test them!
Download an install/live ISO for each of them. Then install each one (separately) into a virtual machine, get a feel for their usage in terms of methods of updates and configuration. Also check to make sure they do actually meet your previously set criteria.

Do this until you're down to at most 2 distributions.

Run it live!
Run a live iso version of the distribution on your own computer, this will let you know if you're hardware is working fine with it.

Finally once you've made your final decision, install it and enjoy.

Last edited by BlackBloodRum on 23 February 2023 at 5:59 pm UTC

Debian.

Quoting: CatKillerYour apparent dichotomy from switching from a conservative distro that's easy to get the latest versions of stuff to either extreme of rolling release or super long-term suggests that you really don't know what you want from a distro.

I used to upgrade Ubuntu every 6 months, but recently find myself going from LTS to LTS. Does Debian stable still take longer than 2 years to release? That's ridiculous. I use "Rolling Debian Testing" at work FWIW, and it rarely gives me any trouble (but it's also curated by the company, so :shrug:)

Quoting: CatKillerIf you want Ubuntu but not snaps because you've heard from Reddit that snaps must be bad, just remove snapd. Or use one of the many Ubuntu derivatives that don't include snapd by default.

Ugh, no, I know what I'm talking about. It's not just snap, Canonical is just making bad decisions all around and it's been years I've been thinking of switching.

Quoting: BlackBloodRumDo this until you're down to at most 2 distributions.

Thanks for the advice, but I mean, I did do that and I'm down to Manjaro vs Debian. I use the company-curated rolling release of Debian at work, and have been fiddling with Manjaro at my parents' house.

The reason I'm asking here is not for general advice, but specifics you can't just observe from live booting, after all gnome on Manjaro and gnome on Debian is just gonna look the same.

The questions were:

- Is either going to give more headaches running games?
- Is either less stable (let's assume rolling Debian)?
- Is there something like PPA/AUR on Debian?
- Are Manjaro rants on the internet about management something I should care about? I don't want to set everything up, then find out it's managed by a*holes.

Quoting: CatKillerNever Manjaro.

And _that_, I really want to know what you have against it.