Comment by Gustavo Benedito Costa on "Which Linux distro is best for developers?"

It depends on the job and on the necessities of the developer.

Non-Ubuntu-derived

Arch Linux = it is a server, but it is not an easy distribution, it is suited for advanced users. As it is completed because of AUR, you configure easily and quickly C++, PHP and Python. It comes with he latest version of PHP – 7.2 and Python – 3.7.1. You install quickly nodejs and npm. Observe that it comes wit the latest version of nodejs and npm. Observe that there is not a minimal distribution of Arch Linux.
Manjaro Linux - derived of Arch Linux, and also a server, but easy and simple. As you do few things, there are minimal distributions of Manjaro – Manjaro Minimal KDE which I use for my laptop, it came with less than 800MB and Manjaro Minimal GTK. You also can customize Manjaro, using Manjaro Architect, to install, according to your necessities and wishes to keep it minimal or not, for example, you can choose one of your favourite environments, select the latest version of PHP, etc.
openSUSE - it also is a server and has the minimal, but it is more or less simple, and very ideal for who wants to work with PHP and Python, it is well suited for who works with JavaScript. I recommend Tumbleweed and KDE.

Derived of Ubuntu:

Deepin OS - derived of Ubuntu, but with a different environment, it is very beautiful and is inspired by macOS 10.13 and macOS 10.14. Unfortunately it is apt-get-based, it may not be good for you.
Kali Linux (not recommended) - only if you are an ethical hacker and a security analyst who woks with these things - C++, PHP and Python. Unfortunately it is apt-get-based, it may not be good for you.
Linux Mint - inspired by Windows, easy and simple. It uses Cinnamon, similar to Windows start menu. Unfortunately it is apt-get-based, it may not be good for you.

Servers:

CentOS - derived of RedHat, it is ideal for you if you want to use a server. It is very similar to openSUSE if you want to configure PHP, Python and JavaScript. C++ is already automatically configured.
Mageia - derived of Mandriva, it is beautiful and elegant, it is ideal if you want to use a server.

There are Ubuntu Server, Red Hat Enterprise Linux (not free, unfortunately) and SUSE Linux Enterprise Server (not free, unfortunately),

Thank you very much for your time.

Why apt-get-based systems aren't recommended? What's the difference?

I use mostly to basically write code. Manage server via SSH, things like that. But not much server sided stuff, though. And probably watch movies, occasionally, browse the internet. That's my overall usage.

Another challenge I am going to face switching to Linux is, I am gonna face a lot of road-blocks along the way. So, I am thinking to go with a fairly popular distribution so that I can find my way around the OS easily with the help of the community. But again, not necessarily as popular as Ubuntu or Mint. I need that balance. Which one would you pick from ones you've already suggested considering this point?

I second the question - what is so obviously wrong with apt-get based systems that you feel it clear without explanation? I use it a lot and have no idea what you're referring to.

codingBug and Mark, as Ubuntu and Debian-derived distributions are not rolling release, do not have something similar to AUR or automation, you have to add new PPAs, new gpg-keys, and to make a lot and a lot of configurations in case of MySQL, PHP, Python, Ruby and Nodejs.

I don't get it. What is inherently wrong with apt-get that you dislike it so much? The list is a little confusing.

You have a separate category for servers but then you say that all non-Ubuntu based OS's are servers? And then define a separate section for servers themselves?

Further, neither Arch nor Manjaro are servers. They can work as servers, but that is not for what they are designed. Along with that, Mageia is not a server. You have mentioned how beautiful it is, and in all fairness, it might be but most servers do not need a GUI. CLI is more than enough.

Mark, agreed? :|

Shreyansh Pandey

I don't get it. What is inherently wrong with apt-get that you dislike it so much? The list is a little confusing.

It does not mean like I dislike Debian-derived distributions, but I felt apt-get-based distributions are limited.

Mageia is not a server.

You are wrong. Wrong. Sorry, you are wrong. In the official website of Magiea Linux (mageia.org/en-gb), it says that it is both desktop and server. Nice try.

Gustavo Benedito Costa

For starters, apt-get based distributions aren't limited. They have one of the most (if not the most) extensive repositories for packages amongst all of their competitors.

As far as adding custom repositories is concerned, everyone who works in the backend field knows that this is something which they should know.

You do have to configure the packages for them to work efficiently. Any one who has used Ubuntu server can install all of what you said in under 5 minutes. When in production, however, you have to customize it to make sure that it's optimized for the right environment.

Mageia is not made for server side deployment. By that logic, you can use any distribution as a server as long as you have the right packages installed. Even if we leave this one out, you have said that about every non Ubuntu derived distribution.

Nice try.

I am not trying anything. I was putting out what I think is correct. You are free to challenge my belief.

Alright, I am on Arch + LXDE right now. Still needs some setup. I have learned my way around and how things work here. It was challenging and fun. Still learning.

Cheers!

Tell how it was. Did you like?

I did like it. Just by installing the Arch distro made me understand a few stuff that I didn't know before. It was a pretty good experience. Then I moved to Ubuntu, used it for the last 5-6 months. Then back on Windows at the moment.

Search Hashnode