fr0g

Of the remaining ones I’d say Fedora is probably the safest bet. Not as cutting edge as the other two, but well engineered and stable.
Rolling releases like Tumbleweed and Endeavour can be more interesting and partifularly good for gaming because they always have the newest stuff and patches and performance improvements. Which can also bite you a bit in the back though if you have an Nvidia graphics card. Nvidia doesn’t play too well with open source and they don’t put a lot of effort into it, so the newest versions of their drivers occasionally break or do stupid stuff. Which isn’t a big deal if you have a system that can rollback (tumbleweed can, dunno about endeavour) but might be a bit annoying sometimes

Those all sound like good distributions to me. Although I would probably scratch NixOS off that list if you don’t want to start out with something complex. It is an extremely unique distro which does things very differently than most distros. Which isn’t a bad thing, but unless that’s specifically what you’re looking for, I’d probably choose something more traditional as first distro.

The point is the efficiency of the money spent on them for the open source ecosystem

Hence my question about SUSE and Canonical. I have exactly zero context for being able to determine that these expenses are excessive. They very well might, but “this number is bigger than the other one” without any industry context whatsoever just doesn’t strike me as a meaningful argument.

That being said, if one’s primary goal is to support open source development, the best way to spend one’s money is obviously to donate to software projects directly. If one needs server support AND wants to spend money in a way that does most for development, the question still stands whether any direct competitors do any better.

Edit: seems like the post from Celestial kinda settles the matter anyways
https://kbin.social/m/linux/t/107420/Reminder-that-RedHat-makes-A-LOT-of-money-already-The#entry-comment-432567

Well these contributions are now behind a paywall. The salary of the sales people devs are now safe.

They factually are not. Any fixes to RHEL go also go to CentOS Stream. and their contributions to the Kernel, GNOME, etc are freely available to anyone as well.

deleted by creator

Also, I’m not really sure what I’m supposed to take away from the whole 66/33 thing. Are SUSE or Canonical handling it notably differently? If they’ve concluded spending lots on PR will get them lots of costumers, making a shitton of money with 1/3 going to devs still might lead to more contributions than making a little ton of money with most going to devs.

RedHat is probably the biggest Linux contributor across the whole ecosystem (for the kernel alone, only companies like Intel, Google or Huawei are sometimes bigger) and the average Linux Desktop user/hobbyist isn’t even their target demographic, so what money to possibly not throw at them are you even talking about? Are you currently paying money for a RedHat subscription?

Also spending money on marketing/ads isn’t the same as selling ads.

I’d still rather see RedHat as one of the biggest kernel/linux contributors make that extra money than fucking Oracle, Amazon etc.

Also:

They sell ads first, IT second.

They sell ads? Source?

Due to my lack of strict knowledge, I take it that there is a difference of opinion on whether RedHat violates the GPL in this case

I don’t think there is a difference of opinion? RedHat only offering source code to paying customers (and devs) is completely legal and in line with the GPL license. But maybe there’s something more to it that I missed.

Hobestly, I can respect that. They seem to be fairly open about the motivations of that decision and who it’s targeted it without devolving into vague fluffy corporate speech too much. You can sense the author was a bit pissed by the reactions.
And I do agree that many of the reactions to the news seemed overblown and I think the actions make sense from their point of view without being super shady, even if it still has some negative repercussions for the open source world as well.

It will stop a lot of people from entering random commands they googled up though.

How does installing packages or configuring software work, if system files can’t be changed?

On reboot. You install your changes into a separate part of the filesystem that’s not running and then “switch parts” on next boot. Different distros do this differently. Vanilla OS has an AB system which basically works like Android does it, openSUSE uses btrfs snapshots and Fedora also uses btrfs I think but they got a more complex layering system on top.

I get that there’s a security benefit just in that malware can’t change system files – but that is achieved by proper permission management on traditional systems too.

Is it though? All it takes is a misconfiguration or exploit to bypass it, so having several layers of protection isn’t a bad thing and how any reasonably secure system works. And having parts of your system predetermined as read only is a comparably tough nut to crack.

Fwiw Lemmy is written in Rust

openSUSE Tumbleweed is great and all, but have you tried openSUSE Aeon/formerly MicroOS Desktop (based on TW)? Don’t really wanna go back to traditional Linux Desktops at this point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKYLF1tA4Ik

However, Kbin maps upvotes to boosts, and displays “favourites” (which include Lemmy upvotes) separately.

Does anyone know if that applies for both threads and replies? I think it make some sense for threads. Would get a bit annoying though if you followed some kbin account on mastodon or similar and every single upvote for every single reply gets boosted.