I'm looking for a picture about the different GNU/Linux distros and their preferred uses and users that is a little...

Here's a simple one
>do you care about software being very up to date?
>no that's not my priority --> Debian stable
>well kind of ---> Debian testing
>I wouldn't even think of having old software --> Debian sid

Attached: Debian.png (2267x1763, 784K)

>arch linux
>uses: engaging in the contrarian circle jerk and staring at loli wallpapers all day while you baby sit your os

>manjaro
>same thing but for lazy contrarians

I thought
Manjaro is to arch as debian testing is to debian sid?

I use Debian to fuck with ppl.

Srsly.

I use Ubuntu for small footprint vms things like Plex or deluge, or things that I probably should be running in docker.

>most autistic/sane minimal
>most sane minimal
Make better category titles. That last part is just lazy.

Does anyone actually use slackware?

I do its underrated desu

>Based off Red Hat?
>Based off Ubuntu?
What a fucking useless criteria for a distro choosing guide.
>Don't have an extra computer?
>Then don't try a live cd.
Why?

What made you choose it?

Not him, but I can tell you my experience with it(about 5 years).

Installation is similiar to old Debian(don't know how it is today). Partitioning, selecting packages, choosing daemons, installing bootloader.

If you are ok with stable packages(latest stable 2016.07) you have most rock solid distro. Something that does work today, will work the same without change unless you change something yourself(the system doesn't fucks itself, the problem is when the user fucks something up).

If you want to "keep up to date" it's not that great, but still not bad. You need to compile a lot of things and most of the time everything works(slackbuilds are great). I had no problem with anything for years building new versions of things from time to time.

Currently I'm running alien's slacklive from June 27, I was lazy and wanted to "start a new with most current packages builded already", because my install was very old and wanted to skip a lot of compiling.

This system is kind of broken, I needed to track down a lot of things, applying patches myself, rebuilding stuff etc. I regret it, because it fucked so much that I had more to fix than when I used stable with my "current" packages. Fortunately everything I use works, but it doesn't change the fact that there was a lot broken things, probably there is more broken things that I don't see...

Bleeding edge software is not worth it, update only when new version have significant improvement or they are needed for something.

Now, I'm waiting for next Slackware stable and will not install ever non-official system(alien). BDFL knows better and his builds are of highest quality. It's easier to start on stable and build your system up yourself than depend on third party.

For the question: I've chosen it because it's sane and simple. I would recommend it both to newbies(to learn linux) as well as to veteran(to have reliable system).

Why

Consider using CRUX or at least use their package manager, you can automate much of the patches by doing ports and keep your system updated without much tampering. There was an attempt at porting the CRUX package manager to Slackware, check that too.

From what I actually used:
>Terminals scare me
PCLinuxOS > Lubuntu > Mint
>Terminals make me anxious
Devuan > Debian
>I know what a script file is (and possibly how to use a compiler)
CRUX > Gentoo > Slackware

> comparing Plan 9 with freedos
whoever made that pic is really dumb and should end himself

Hey, he got some things right. Granted, some others are utterly retarded like including BSDshit but others are good.