Zero-maintenance distro?

Need the most zero-maintenance Linux or BSD distro.

Help me choose.

Attached: 1494524675086.jpg (750x750, 96K)

Debian Stable

gentoo

Anything that isn't source-based or rolling release

CentOS w/ an ZFS root.

It's a b i t c h to setup, but configured correctly for security, 10 years of release support, and only pushes security patches.

Attached: 1526596958603.png (1280x1092, 413K)

linux mint cinnamon just werks

i can stay a few versions behind and not GAF

some autistis will scream security but after seeing all the dumb shit a rolling release like arch breaks ill just stick to the debian way of doing things

Define zero-maintenance of what?

Yes on the CentOS + ZFS. Use that combo at work, rock solid!

Linux Mint:
Works out of the box
Based on Ubuntu 16.04 LTS (Long Term Stable);
You can leave it for years and nothing will randomly break:
Automatic security updates (of course they can easily be turned of you like)
Easy to use, even swapping drivers is just the click of a button:
You can do more advanced Linux shit or just happily click buttons and use it for whatever you need. Or both.

>linux mint
>the debian way
You could not be more wrong.

I'm developing C# on it without issue, I'd say if it can do that it can handle anything.

explain

by debian i meant conservative

/thread

I don't think there's really a such thing as shit happens, but I'd say Arch. You install it and incrementally update it.

Ubuntu or Mint both are solid as rocks.

t. Never used an Ubuntu LTS based distro

>Arch
He said zero-maintenance not zero time left after maintenance

It's used in enterprise where minimal fuckery and strict just werks are long-ass-term requirements. They shove XFS and call it a day.

ZFS introduces fuckery to the update system but you have snapshots to safeguard your running system and it makes your root partition ubreakable during operating hours, clonable, and easy to backup and restore.

Attached: 1526631137648.jpg (480x480, 61K)

would say because it's a great distro that is minimal enough to suit every need. Distro's aren't "high maintenance". Linux takes time because people go through phases and keep installing new distro's and DE's time after time. They just keep doing stuff to their system "because they can" which always ends in drama because setting up new environments in linux is trickier than it is in any other OS because stuff is made by tech elitist devs who think you need no convenience. Debian stable keeps you from that because it's a stable base for whatever you want to do.

Attached: drater.jpg (750x750, 293K)

Dude Mint breaks so quickly

CentOS

Slackware

just don't update it

CentOS. No GUI or other bs. Air gapped. UPS. In a bunker. That no one knows about. Turn it on then kys.

Attached: aint-nobody-got-time-for-that-quote-1.jpg (659x372, 48K)

Pay Red Hat bois to do it for you because you aren't europoor.

Debian Unstable.

Pure, solid Debian . . . but packages up to date.

Accept no substitutes.

Attached: IMG_20180303_112610.jpg (1100x619, 80K)

idk, Ubuntu? Fedora? Cent? They're all pretty easy.

but security updates aren't managed by the security team...

mint breaks fast what the fuck?

DEVUAN.

Because Debian, but fuck SystemDachau.

Attached: Z6K4lPT.jpg (439x290, 21K)

>Sid
>Zero-maintenance
No.

CentOS is for servers and I think it has even older packages than freaking Debian stable, so it should be a great choice for this use case.

Zero-maintenance? Get:

1) Bic pen
2) Big Chief tablet
3) abacus

There you go.

FreeBSD is easy, they have a handbook that answers any question you could possibly have about setting up the system to do whatever you need. For third party software, there are upgrade guides right in the ports repo (UPDATING file), that contain things like: how to migrate from samba 3 to 4, postgresql migration, etc.

Their documentation goes a long way. Think of how useful the arch wiki is for their users, but imagine the base system isn't unstable Arch. You have answers to any possible problems, but also, you have problems less often (YEARS).

Best of all, if you want unstable and source based, they have that too. So you end up just having to learn 1 OS that covers every machine configuration you could have. I don't have to learn anything new. It seems like the smart(lazy) mans choice to me.

That being said, I'm sure there are other operating systems that have these qualities, it just happens to be the first I encountered that has lasted this long.

Attached: 1497919979954.png (3555x2198, 945K)

Yes the packages are old a fugg on centos but damn that thing is rock solid. You cant even install python 3 through default repos kek

>2009
yee

Attached: me irl.jpg (475x450, 139K)

Kubuntu, and Manjaro.

don't use free, use net or open

Debian Stable with KDE, for the easy updates just two clicks and your password away.

Mint with Matte or Cinnamon, very stable in my opinion, never managed to break it to this date
Debian works well too
Want to test other crap? use Virtual box first before committing your system and wasting time

Unironically openBSD
>install which you do in under 3 mins as a first timer
>only bother again in 6 months

OpenBSD, for servers.