Those who don’t have the time or appetite to tweak/modify/troubleshoot their computers: What is your setup for a reliable and low-maintenance system?
Context:
I switched to Linux a couple of years ago (Debian 11/12). It took me a little while to learn new software and get things set up how I wanted, which I did and was fine.
I’ve had to replace my laptop though and install a distro (Fedora 41) with a newer kernel to make it work but even so, have had to fix a number of issues. This has also coincided with me having a lot less free time and being less interested in crafting my system and more interested in using it efficiently for tasks and creativity. I believe Debian 13 will have a new enough kernel to support my hardware out of the box and although it will still be a hassle for me to reinstall my OS again, I like the idea of getting it over with, starting again with something thoroughly tested and then not having to really touch anything for a couple of years. I don’t need the latest software at all times.
I know there are others here who have similar priorities, whether due to time constraints, age etc.
Do you have any other recommendations?
Desktop:
Server:
Zero maintenance for any of them. Not just low maintenance, but zero.
Running exotic niche server images out in the wild…
It’s just Fedora CoreOS with some QoL packages added at build time. Not niche at all. The very minor changes made are all transparent on GitHub.
Choose CoreOS if you prefer, it’s equally zero maintenance.
Yeah, sure. I was running Bluefin-DX. One day image maintainers decided to replace something and things break. UBlue is an amazing project. Team is trying hard but it’s definitely not zero mainainace. I fear they are chasing so many UBlue flavours, recently an LTS one based on CoreOS, spreading thin.
If you depend on third party modules you’ll end up with third party maintenance - we didn’t purposely decide to break this we don’t work at Nvidia.
Jorge, OP asked about “not having to really touch anything for a couple of years”. I am just sharing my experience. Big fan of containers and really appreciate your efforts of pulling containers tech into Linux desktop. Thank you!
I don’t understand the answer though. Maybe I am missing something here. There’s an official Bluefin-DX-Nvidia iso. Nvidia-containers-toolkit was part of that iso.
On a separate note, I liked the idea of GTS edition. Since few weeks ago iso became unavailable pending some fix. At the same time I see loads of new LTS edition buzz. It’s still in Alpha though. I feel confused.
The answer is if you’re depending on software that is closed and out of your control (aka. you have an Nvidia card) then you should have support expectations around that hardware and linux.
There are no GTS ISOs because we don’t have a reliable way to make ISOs (the ones we have now are workarounds) but that should be finished soon.
Thanks for clarifying, Jorge. I wish I lived in a perfect world where all hardware and software follow FOSS principles. Until then I will have to rely on the other distros that embrace an imperfect reality. I cannot reconcile how Bluefin targets developers and NVidia, unfortunately is not something many of those developers can afford to ignore. Good luck with your project!
It’s like a saving throw in a video game, most times you can make it, but every once in a while you don’t lol.
🤷 I’ve been running Aurora and uCore for over a year and have yet to do any maintenance.
You can roll back to the previous working build by simply restarting, it’s pretty much the easiest fix ever and still zero maintenance (since you didn’t have to reconfigure or troubleshoot anything, just restart).
This is the way. The uBlue derivatives benefit from the most shared knowledge and problem-solving skills being delivered directly to users.
Between that, and using a decorative distrobox config, I get an actually reliable system with packages from any distro I want.
Doesn’t ucore also have to restart to apply updates?
Not super ideal for a server as far as maintenance and uptime to have unexpected, frequent restarts as opposed to in-place updates, unless one’s startup is completely automated and drives are on-device keyfile decrypted, but that probably fits some threat models for security.
The desktop versions are great!
This is such a weird take given that 99.9% of people here are just running this on their home servers which aren’t dictated by a SLA, so it’s not like people need to worry about reboots. Just reboot once a month unless there’s some odd CVE you need to hit sooner than later.
So why would somebody run that on their homeserver compared to tried and true staples with tons of documentation? 🍿
You’re right, they should be running Windows Server as God intended 😆
It’s just Fedora CoreOS with some small quality-of-life packages added to the build.
There’s tons of documentation for CoreOS and it’s been around for more than a decade.
If you’re running a container workload, it can’t be beat in my opinion. All the security and configuration issues are handled for you, which is especially ideal for a home user who is generally not a security expert.
That is very fair!!
But on the other hand, 99.9% of users don’t read all of the change notes for their packages and don’t have notifications for CVEs. In that case, in my opinion just doing updates as they come would be easier and safer.
They won’t apply unexpectedly, so you can reboot at a time that suits. Unless there’s a specific security risk there’s no need to apply them frequently. Total downtime is the length of a restart, which is also nice and easy.
It won’t fit every use-case, but if you’re looking for a zero-maintenance containerized-workload option, it can’t be beat.
Run k3s on top and run your stateless services on a lightweight kubernetes, then you won’t care you have to reboot your hosts to apply updates?
deleted by creator