Current Events > I installed a Linux distro

(+) Yeah! (+)

VirtuousWrath posted...

Oh fuck, gaming on Linux has come a long way since I last used it lol

Yeah, thats mostly on Valve. Not everything is perfect. Nut check the games you want to play on ProtonDB.

The main things you miss are always online live service games with anti-cheat, because the anti-cheat flags playing on Linux as cheating.

MarthGoomba posted...

Having to tinker just to get 4k60hz to work...

I quit

Use Displayport, not HDMI.

flussence posted...

Use Displayport, not HDMI.

Oh, this. Why would you use HDMI for a monitor? HDMI is inferior.

I've also noticed a weird case where some games have to be played in offline mode because, while 99% of the game is Proton compatible, for whatever reason the online portal is not and causes crashing. >_>

flussence posted...

Use Displayport, not HDMI.

TVs usually don't have Displayport

Masked-One posted...

I've also noticed a weird case where some games have to be played in offline mode because, while 99% of the game is Proton compatible, for whatever reason the online portal is not and causes crashing. >_>

Yeah. This always online shit is terrible from a game preservation standpoint, so I worry about the future of gaming.

MarthGoomba posted...

TVs usually don't have Displayport

Then you'll need a DP converter. Linux will never be able to have high-res HDMI because of licensing bullshit

PraetorXyn posted...

Either way, I wouldnt touch Fedora on general principle. Ive never liked Red Hat anyway, but since IBM bought them, they are currently being ripped a new one by the FOSS community for trying to close source RHEL, so especially not now.

Yeah. The last week in tech news is why I'm looking at a move to Debian at my first opportunity.

Destroyer53 posted...

If you have it on steam then it works with proton.

But I still wouldn't be able to mod New Vegas, would I?

(I've got plenty of other Steam games I'm looking forward to testing and playing out of my library, so it's not a huge loss. But that was one of my reasons to dual boot: modding.)

DnDer posted...

But I still wouldn't be able to mod New Vegas, would I?

(I've got plenty of other Steam games I'm looking forward to testing and playing out of my library, so it's not a huge loss. But that was one of my reasons to dual boot: modding.)

Not as a one-click solution, but if you setup a WINE bottle and install Vortex Mod Manager in it, then setup a MIME type association to tell the browser to send those nexus mods links to it, it works the way youd expect it to for the most part. You can probably find a guide on setting that up.

Of course, for Bethesda games, Mod Organizer is better, and thats a whole other can of worms on Linux.

But stuff like that is the reason I still run Windows on my desktop.

DnDer posted...

But I still wouldn't be able to mod New Vegas, would I?

(I've got plenty of other Steam games I'm looking forward to testing and playing out of my library, so it's not a huge loss. But that was one of my reasons to dual boot: modding.)

Maybe. I'm not familiar with how mods are done with that game, but I've been able to mod other games I play on Linux by just running installers through wine.

PraetorXyn posted...

If you ever tried to use a laptop with Nvidia Optimus (the technology that makes it use the discrete graphics on the CPU to save power most of the time, and switch to the discrete GPU when it needs the power), that was (and May still be) a massive headache on Linux.

Optimus works just fine for me (only issue is that on Arch-based distros I need to rebuild optimus-manager whenever Python has a big update, or else it'll break my graphical environment, thanks AUR >_>)

MarthGoomba posted...

Having to tinker just to get 4k60hz to work...

I quit

Have you gotten it to work?

This is actually one of the things I keep my Windows partition around for <_<

FL81 posted...

Have you gotten it to work?

This is actually one of the things I keep my Windows partition around for <_<

As was pointed out above, if you use a display with DisplayPort, it should just work. The HDMI Forum refuses to have an open driver for HDMI 2.1, so even if you use a HDMI to DP converter, some things probably wont work, like VRR. Blame the HDMI Forum, not Linux.

FL81 posted...

Have you gotten it to work?

Nope

PraetorXyn posted...

Of course, for Bethesda games, Mod Organizer is better, and thats a whole other can of worms on Linux.

I've never tried running Mod Organizer on Linux. Is it worth it? From a gaming perspective it's one of the only things keeping me on Windows.

CRON posted...

I've never tried running Mod Organizer on Linux. Is it worth it? From a gaming perspective it's one of the only things keeping me on Windows.

I havent tried it either lol.

All I know is youd have to set up a WINE bottle for it and every mod would have to be installed through WINE. Mod Organizer is enough of a headache even on Windows, so Ive always been scared to attempt it.

PraetorXyn posted...

I havent tried it either lol.

All I know is youd have to set up a WINE bottle for it and every mod would have to be installed through WINE. Mod Organizer is enough of a headache even on Windows, so Ive always been scared to attempt it.

I've never had any issues with MO on Windows outside of Oblivion being a pain in the ass.

CRON posted...

I've never had any issues with MO on Windows outside of Oblivion being a pain in the ass.

I more meant trying to get a hundred different mods to work together without breaking things.

PraetorXyn posted...

As was pointed out above, if you use a display with DisplayPort, it should just work. The HDMI Forum refuses to have an open driver for HDMI 2.1, so even if you use a HDMI to DP converter, some things probably wont work, like VRR. Blame the HDMI Forum, not Linux.

Turns out my laptop does have a Mini DisplayPort port, but my LG TV only has HDMI. Still, reluctant to purchase a Mini DP to HDMI cable when I'm still not 100% on what the exact issue is (for all I know it could just be the graphics drivers or the Xfce compositor acting weird)

I mean, "it works" as is, but my laptop and TV having different resolutions and refresh rates is probably causing the tearing and overscan

I just wanna watch my animu on the big screen >_>

FL81 posted...

Turns out my laptop does have a Mini DisplayPort port, but my LG TV only has HDMI. Still, reluctant to purchase a Mini DP to HDMI cable when I'm still not 100% on what the exact issue is (for all I know it could just be the graphics drivers or the Xfce compositor acting weird)

I mean, "it works" as is, but my laptop and TV having different resolutions and refresh rates is probably causing the tearing and overscan

I just wanna watch my animu on the big screen >_>

The issue is that Linux is free, so whoever is maintaining the distro is not paying the HDMI forum a license fee for every user, so it would be illegal even if there was a driver for it. But there isnt a driver for HDMI 2.1. So its using the latest open HDMI driver there is, which probably only supports 4K/30FPS, no VRR, etc.

The proper solution for what you want to do would be a media server like Plex, Emby, or Jellyfin. I run all three, but Jellyfin is the one I typically use as Plexs UI takes too many clicks to get to things, it doesnt look as nice IMO, and its designed to phone home to authenticate, so by default you cant even watch your own media if the internets out (you can disable Authy on your LAN, but then anyone on your LAN has admin access).

If you feel like purchasing a NAS, thats the ideal host for a media server since it runs all the time, but since thats expensive, you can just install a media server on your laptop, then connect to it either with your smart TV (most TVs have a Plex app, but probably wont have Jellyfin) or a streaming box like Nvidia Shield Pro, Roku, Fire TV, AppleTV, etc. Just install the streaming client on your TV or box, then connect to the server running on your laptop.

PraetorXyn posted...

The issue is that Linux is free, so whoever is maintaining the distro is not paying the HDMI forum a license fee for every user, so it would be illegal even if there was a driver for it. But there isnt a driver for HDMI 2.1. So its using the latest open HDMI driver there is, which probably only supports 4K/30FPS, no VRR, etc.

The proper solution for what you want to do would be a media server like Plex, Emby, or Jellyfin. I run all three, but Jellyfin is the one I typically use as Plexs UI takes too many clicks to get to things, it doesnt look as nice IMO, and its designed to phone home to authenticate, so by default you cant even watch your own media if the internets out (you can disable Authy on your LAN, but then anyone on your LAN has admin access).

If you feel like purchasing a NAS, thats the ideal host for a media server since it runs all the time, but since thats expensive, you can just install a media server on your laptop, then connect to it either with your smart TV (most TVs have a Plex app, but probably wont have Jellyfin) or a streaming box like Nvidia Shield Pro, Roku, Fire TV, AppleTV, etc. Just install the streaming client on your TV or box, then connect to the server running on your laptop.

meh, might just have to give Jellyfin a try then

All I really need though is cast-to-TV software (oddly enough my LG TV has exactly that, but only for Windows). I don't really need a whole media server or library organization

First time Linux users really should go with Ubuntu, it's not the absolute best distro but it's definitely the easiest to throw a Windows user into without them being completely lost. The LTS versions specifically.

FL81 posted...

meh, might just have to give Jellyfin a try then

All I really need though is cast-to-TV software (oddly enough my LG TV has exactly that, but only for Windows). I don't really need a whole media server or library organization

I tried and tried and tried to get a cast to tv software to work. VLC would only cast the audio. CLI tools either didn't work or also worked with just the audio. In the end I gave up and set up Plex.

Enclave posted...

First time Linux users really should go with Ubuntu, it's not the absolute best distro but it's definitely the easiest to throw a Windows user into without them being completely lost. The LTS versions specifically.

No it isnt, Mint is.

PraetorXyn posted...

No it isnt, Mint is.

What makes Mint easier for me, a newbie Ubuntu user?

I see Ubuntu as a string of bad decisions. Unity, Snap, Upstart, Mir, etc. Hard to recommend it even given its simplicity and Linux versions of software targeting it the most. Apt is also a pretty slow package manager.

I can't go back to a distro without the AUR.

Enclave posted...

First time Linux users really should go with Ubuntu,

Isn't the better question to ask which DE and file manager is better for new users? I've heard more than once, from more than one channel that, "distros don't matter."

Beyond the moral principles behind opposing the data harvesting of Canonical or the closed-source antithesis of linux by IBM, of course. That matters when choosing a distro.

But it has less impact on "new user friendliness," I'll admit.

scar_the_1 posted...

What makes Mint easier for me, a newbie Ubuntu user?

Cinnamon is designed to mimic Windows more than anything else is, and Mint was forked off Ubuntu with the explicit purpose of making things easier for transitioning Windows users. Things also tend to just work more than they do on Ubuntu.

Starks posted...

I see Ubuntu as a string of bad decisions. Unity, Snap, Upstart, Mir, etc. Hard to recommend it even given its simplicity and Linux versions of software targeting it the most. Apt is also a pretty slow package manager.

I can't go back to a distro without the AUR.

On desktop / laptop, absolutely. Debian is probably still the best thing for servers.

DnDer posted...

Isn't the better question to ask which DE and file manager is better for new users? I've heard more than once, from more than one channel that, "distros don't matter."

Beyond the moral principles behind opposing the data harvesting of Canonical or the closed-source antithesis of linux by IBM, of course. That matters when choosing a distro.

But it has less impact on "new user friendliness," I'll admit.

I dont like that philosophy at all. Its true from a theoretical standpoint. What theyre trying to say is that if you know what youre doing, you can make basically anything work on basically any distro.

From a practical standpoint, distro still matters as far as Im concerned, because while its possible to get newer developer friendly versions of various things on CentOS 7 instead of the ancient packages that distro ships with I should know as my work forced me to use that as its what the servers ran it involves jumping through hoops, usually adding manual package sources, or installing Flatpak / app image versions and losing theming support, etc., and is just generally a massive pain in the ass.

Whereas on Arch-based distros especially ones that use the same package sources as vanilla Arch the AUR puts the world at your fingertips as it were, as basically any niche tiny little piece of software you can find can be installed via a single command.

I never let a DE dictate my distro options. Installing and switching to a new DE is usually simple enough. I'm usually apathetic because I would boot into Linux for something specific and not for a workflow. That being said, Plasma is better for a Windows-like while Gnome has the perception of better polish and a better toolkit.

For servers, things are getting complicated with Red Hat's decision. Hard to keep track of who is targeting which sources and who is going to hard fork.

Starks posted...

I never let a DE dictate my distro options. Installing and switching to a new DE is usually simple enough. I'm usually apathetic because I would boot into Linux for something specific and not for a workflow. That being said, Plasma is better for a Windows-like while Gnome has the perception of better polish and a better toolkit.

For servers, things are getting complicated with Red Hat's decision. Hard to keep track of who is targeting which sources and who is going to hard fork.

Companies are unfortunately probably stick to Red Hat for that paid support. It would be nice if this fiasco just cripples or kills them though, as Ive never liked Red Hat.

Starks posted...

I see Ubuntu as a string of bad decisions. Unity, Snap, Upstart, Mir, etc. Hard to recommend it even given its simplicity and Linux versions of software targeting it the most. Apt is also a pretty slow package manager.

I can't go back to a distro without the AUR.

What would be the use case where those things are noticeable? I've never really had issues with apt being too slow, and the others I don't even know when I encounter.

Apt appears to go through extra steps compared pacman.

PraetorXyn posted...

No it isnt, Mint is.

I'll be honest, I haven't even looked at Mint in MANY years so my knowledge regarding it is woefully out of date.

CRON posted...

Ubuntu's great but uses Snaps which are a pain in the ass compared to Flatpaks.

You should be able to install flatpaks on Ubuntu.

I've never really had to use flatpaks or appimages.

Starks posted...

I've never really had to use flatpaks or appimages.

IDK man the first time I clicked on a flatpak I was like "where was this 30 years ago"

I don't like Snaps

would probably still be on Xubuntu if not for Snaps

What's so bad about snaps?

VirtuousWrath posted...

What's so bad about snaps?

At least in my experience they were larger packages, opened slower, and didn't theme correctly with the rest of my desktop

VirtuousWrath posted...

What's so bad about snaps?

They are statically linked (meaning all dependencies are included in the executable, instead of it just pointing at them in a shared location like distro packages do this results in larger file sizes), and dont respect system themes. This is true of Flatpak and appimage as well.

Flatpak is open source, faster than snap, doesnt need admin privileges to install packages, is more popular and more widely available across distros, and has multiple package sources available.

Snap is proprietary, slower than Flatpak, needs admin privileges to install packages, is basically only used on Ubuntu and variants, and only has the package source Canonical says you have.

In short, Flatpak is superior to snap in basically every way from an end-user standpoint. Snap has some advantages from a distro maintainer and developer standpoint, but users have no reasons to care about that.

Ironically, I think static linking is a feature and not a bug

VirtuousWrath posted...

Ironically, I think static linking is a feature and not a bug

It is when its needed. Otherwise its just wasteful. Granted, larger file sizes dont matter much these days with storage as cheap and ubiquitous as it is, but space is space and static linking has no advantage Im aware of besides allowing backwards / forwards compatibility (i.e., on Linux, flatpaks etc allow you to install an older or newer version of a package that requires a version of a system dependency that would conflict with most of the other stuff that depends on said dependency).

This is why Ive never used Flatpak etc.: because I have never run into anything I couldnt just install through the package manager. When I do, only then will I use them.

The only thing to not link statically is openssl

But aside from that, it's better for app devs which is better for users. Exactly for versioning reasons as you mentioned

Just installed Linux Mint on my laptop that had Windows 10 that had a lot of slowdown. I originally thought it was the hard drive, but I did a clean install by getting rid of windows entirely. That wasn't the case at all. The only problem I had was booting it up and I got a "Bad Shim Signature" error code which was easily remedied by turning Secure Boot off in the BIOS.

VirtuousWrath posted...

The only thing to not link statically is openssl

But aside from that, it's better for app devs which is better for users. Exactly for versioning reasons as you mentioned

As a developer I disagree completely. My company created and maintains a huge financial system much of the federal government uses to do its financials, and the backend is in C++. That codebase is massive, probably thousands of files if not tens of thousands. The build is multithreaded, and creates dozens of what are basically application servers that handle different responsibilities.

On Windows, on a quad core CPU, that build takes about 2+ hours because it has to be linked statically.

On Linux it takes less than half the time because of shared linking, and performs at least as good as a Windows build (probably better, its not like Ive benchmarked it, but Im not aware of any hosted Windows environments Im only comparing based on my personal builds).

DirkDiggles posted...

Just installed Linux Mint on my laptop that had Windows 10 that had a lot of slowdown. I originally thought it was the hard drive, but I did a clean install by getting rid of windows entirely. That wasn't the case at all. The only problem I had was booting it up and I got a "Bad Shim Signature" error code which was easily remedied by turning Secure Boot off in the BIOS.

Its actually possible to make SecureBoot work with Lpany Linux distro, and its not that hard.
https://www.rodsbooks.com/efi-bootloaders/secureboot.html

Its a fun learning experience at any rate.

For what its worth Ubuntu probably just works as I think Microsoft signs Canonicals stuff with its own key or accepts Canonicals signing key as trusted, etc.

PraetorXyn posted...

On Windows, on a quad core CPU, that build takes about 2+ hours because it has to be linked statically.

Why are you building on a quad core?