The desktop admin at the place I work set up a bunch of stupid rules for all of us if we wanted a linux workstation.
Now that he's gone, I get to decide the standard, because his never worked for anyone
All I have to do is pick a distro that's fairly minimal, and generally stable (something like Arch, but maybe not rolling release)
Other urls found in this thread:
old.reddit.com
twitter.com
make your own gentoo overlay or binhost
Slackware
Maybe, I'm honestly thinking of throwing caution to the wind and just having us use Arch.
If we keep our eyes open as we update nobody should have problems, and if we do, the forums are so helpful
I busted so many nuts to this doujin.
Using Arch at work sounds fucking stupid. Arch is everything BUT stable, it changes every day. Use something actually stable, like CentOS, Debian Stable or an Ubuntu LTS.
if you're going to use a rolling release distro consider having docker or something to keep the projects that you build on consistent versions of libraries etc
Why not Debian? Using arch for work sounds like a terrible idea.
Those are too far in the opposite direction for us, I'm specifically not able to pick those actually
That's definitely something to think about
Do you work for Ricers Inc. or some shit?
>Those are too far in the opposite direction for us, I'm specifically not able to pick those actually
Why is that? It's not like they cost your employer any money.
Drop the whole no rolling release shit and try manjaro. Bretty gud
Just let people use whatever the fuck they want. They are already doing behind someone's back anyhow. You dont know about it because no one wants to deal with some shitty fagmin.
>arch
Have fun with the support costs.
Your choice. Don't come crying to us blaming freetards in a few months when Arch decides to shit itself when you actually have work to do. It may be a great distro for hobbyists, but you asked something stable (for good reason) and Arch is not stable. It changes way too much due to it being both rolling release and bleeding edge.
Have you ever seen a work/corporate server running Arch?
Yeah, no. That leads to a whole host of support costs and wasted time spent cleaning up after ransomware and other shit.
The perfect workstation would be a Windows machine joined to a domain and locked down by Group Policy and Deep Freeze. The user's home directory is saved to a network drive, accessible via VPN. Additional software can be distributed via an internal app store.
OP, I know you want to be a madlad and use Arch, but some retard on your team is going to fuck it up. just fucking pick debian or fedora or some shit.
Really? It's not rolling? I guess I don't know much about Manjaro
There are rules that prevent us from setting up our workstations the way we want
it's like 3 of us
There are people out there who do it, I just wanted people to throw distro names at me, you guys are obviously not responsible for what I pick
We're really overestimating how many of us the affects
>support costs
What costs? Are you just a moron? Its already happening anyhow and you're just yet another clueless control freak retard who controls literally nothing.
fedora is for corporate
>Those are too far in the opposite direction for us
elaborate on this
intelligent
not
Which one is it
checked
Not my opinion, just what I was told
Maybe, any suggestions that haven't been mentioned?
Ya, fuck off retard and take your shitty company under with you. Fucking retard zoomer pussy faggot bitch.
You're clearly an utter moron and the person doing this job was likely equally moronic. You speak like rules mean anything when they clearly interfere with correct or reasonable solutions and seem to have no will to either break them or have intelligent discussions with people above you to fix it. Worse of all is there is only three of you special snowflakes that care about this utter nonsense to begin with. Kill yourself useless zoomer faggot.
Most of the things that restrict us aren't from within the company, but from outside pressures
There's more than 3 of us, but only 3 or so are planning on going for linux workstations
try to not be upset
>If we keep our eyes open as we update nobody should have problems, and if we do, the forums are so helpful
Everyone understands sysadmins are generally completely incompetent cs dropouts, but if one of you mongoloids choose Arch with this justification, I'd be putting in my notice.
Get jinxed
Near as I can tell you're not allowed to use mainstream distros because they're not minimal enough. This is dumb because "minimal" is not a property of a distro, it's a consequence of which packages you install. If you want minimal, install the base system only, then use the package manager to install XFCE or Openbox.
I'm spitballing ideas, I figure the 3 of us can handle a little arch
not a sysadmin btw, just a dev
you need me to wipe your bum bum after you go poopies later?
Yes, ty. Can you also click it and screenshot the Google results so I don't have it directly associated with my shadow Google account?
>minimal
>stable
arch is neither of those things. If you actually want something stable and minimal, it's going to depend on how minimal you want. My go-to for stability is Debian stable or Devuan ascii.
I'd avoid stuff like Void, Gentoo, Slackware, or the BSDs. There's "minimal and stable," and there's "impractical." Everyone draws that line differently, but it's safe to say Void/Gentoo/etc are comfortably within the "impractical" category for anyone who isn't kidding themselves.
Unironically Ubuntu. Just werks.
RHEL, Debian Stable, or Ubuntu LTS. There are your only real choices.
Yeah, I'm not sold on arch or anything yet, just getting names
I only mention arch because of how many resources there are online
Thanks for the suggestions
Yeah, maybe we look at making that usable somehow
Seethe for me some more baby nigger
no problem, user. That's fair, Arch has fantastic documentation compared to other distros of its ilk. I think you'd be impressed by the Debian wiki, though. It gets buried in goolag searches for some reason, but it's pretty damn good in my experience.
lazyanon btfo
Ubuntu Budgie is a delightful and modern looking UI with shitty apt ubuntu cli environment that everyone supports
disto suggstion - openSuSE
direct path to SuSE if you need enterprise support
but out of interest what were the stupid rules? only distro restriction? was there more to it than that? Domain join? Software licensing?
Unironically install gentoo
Kek this but unironically
Who the fuck thinks Arch is worth a damn as a server OS for anything long-term?
>it's like 3 of us
Ok so you and your i3-gaps using friends can run your dogshit startup on arch. Dont come crying when shit breaks.
>I just wanted people to throw distro names at me
OpenSUSE Leap.
>Not my opinion, just what I was told
I know you're just working with 2 other people but you really need to get clarification as to WHY. What are you looking for?
>but only 3 or so are planning on going for linux workstations
Mageia unironically then. For your workstations, not servers.
There are resources online for many, many other distros. You might be better off with something like Fedora or RHEL.
Mint Xfce. Xfce is the only stable DE. Mint is more ready to use out of the box than Ubuntu.
If you're using some professional tools then you should go with Fedora since it's the industry standard.
XUBUNTU
Seriously.
Roll it out with some setup scripts to get your domain niggery working.
Xubuntu is just Mint Xfce that needs to be made to behave like Mint. Mint Xfce is a better option.
Windows XP
SuSE, Debian or CentOS!!
If you are going with any ubuntu then just go with normal ubuntu LTS. Not xubuntu/kubuntu/lubuntu/mint/etc.
pick something enterprise-grade like debian
Debian netinst. That's what Google took as a basis for its distro.
Or yes, CentOS. Cucked by Gnome so UX won't be so good, but it has a 10 year support cycle. Wait till CentOS 8, though.
seriously bros
image search just gives me identical images
where do i find the original
>using Arsch Loonux at work
Shit LARP. If it isn't you're about to be fired.
RHEL or CentOS would be the best choices.
Your post reeks of stupidity.
Why not Xubuntu? Fairly stable and good support. Xfce gets rid the bloat. I just stopped using Arch based stuff after I forgot to update for 1 month and it broke a bunch of shit. I didn't feel like fixing it all to get my settings back, the juice wasn't worth the squeeze.
The UI is awful, is regular Ubuntu's LTS longer then 3 years? Thats what Xubuntu says. I guess the users could just throw on a new wm if they chose too, but still... Xubuntu seems like the best choice. After watching some of that Portland Debian fag fest I'm hesitant about suggesting such a thing lol
gnome 3 on ubuntu 18.04 is a fucking abomination and buggy as hell. Even unity was better. Also, there's no reason to not use xfce if you want to get work done, or KDE if you want something that looks good. In any case, the underlying system on xubuntu or kubuntu is literally identical besides not having wasted space on a shitty DE or amazon spyware
For work, I'd recommend centos.
It can be a bit inconvenient to use on a desktop, but I have been using on a laptop and a desktop for years now and I have only ever had issues with graphic cards, which shouldn't be an issue for a workstation.
>Running enterprise Linux
>Not using Fedora/RedHat/CentOS
>Only remotely thinking about Ubuntu
>Seriously thinking about Arch
This is why you people are unemployable.
MX Linux.
>stable
>popular
or openSUSE for the music covers
gentoo
(use centos)
fedora
>Barely anyone mentioning Debian
The state of this board, Christ.
OP, Debian is minimal and the most stable distro alongside Slackware. It's the grandaddy of Linux that didn't take a corporate dick up its ass like Red Hat.
If you prefer rpm go for Fedora but honestly, Debian is a much safer option on the long run.
>If we keep our eyes open as we update nobody should have problems, and if we do, the forums are so helpful
I know all the windows immigrants and arch can't install will jump on you but if you're on the mailing list and not using testing I don't see the problem.
fedora kde
Alpine
crops never return relevant results, nigger
that might be the only company I wouldn't mind going to work for
manjaro is just arch with packages delayed by 2 weeks, its garbage
NixOS. Install NixOS.
Use CentOS.
No really.
Don't use Arch, if you value your business/sanity.
manjaro IS rolling release, but it pulls from arch repos and the manjaro team validates packages before pushing them to stable. it's basically arch with a few days of bug testing before updates.
>using google and not yandex
it's like you don't even want to find the image source at all
just use nonfree debian stable like a normal person
Debian is the answer. If you want to sabotage your company, use Gentoo instead of Arch.
>using Arch in the workplace for more than just that one autist who demands it.
Lmfao good luck with it op
Manjaro + latest LTS kernel
Its more or less arch with delayed updates and a stable kernel.
For me it is just the right combo of edge+stablilty.
linux is just a kernel
You're retarded.
Gentoo, Debian, Void
Trisquel
I think I'm doing it right.
old.reddit.com
I'm going to give you a serious answer as someone that has setup and managed workstations. The easy way is to use Debian and remote management tools (like puppet, but I don't use or recommend that, just an example.) The security scheme depends on the company, but probably a vpn that's only for SSH from whitelisted IPs for management.
The hard way, but the better way, would be to use NixOS which would mean writing a nix configuration file that can be distributed and potentially linking together the workstations to share packages (and cpu time if compilation is ever necessary.) You can keep the configuration up to date with git, and user-changes can be made in their local nix profile. This method should save long-term effort and reduce the need for remote control management which can be a security issue (and on Debian the alternative is your own package server which is probably not worth the effort)