Which Linux is worth installing for mastering?

Question

linux

Hello!
I began to study C++, for 2 months now I have been studying in the evenings, in my free time.
Reading some articles, I understand that the possession of Linuxe will be + in my further development of C++,
and now I’m thinking which distribution to start with, after reading the documentation of different distributions, I just couldn’t decide. Arch is very interesting with its philosophy, Monjaro is also a worthy candidate! Ubuntu, Debiane is in doubt, I don’t know why the new Ubuntu doesn’t come to people, because there are a lot of bad comments, 2 releases have come out and people are still on 16.04!
Generally speaking, tell me which Linuxe will be easier to start, where there is a lot of documentation, an adequate community, guides, etc!

Answer 1

Ubuntu / Mint

Answer 2

How many people - so many opinions. You still have to choose a system, we can only express an opinion based, often, on our experience. Therefore, think carefully and start trying distributions.
It all depends on how easily you adapt and perceive information.
Do not immediately choose a distribution kit "forever". Start with a simpler distribution, learn to work with Linux in general, when you understand what is important to you, then you will already choose a permanent distribution.
If the main goal is programming, then look where there are most different tools for this, and indeed packages in general. I started with Mint, because it required the least knowledge, there were a large number of programs, I liked the interface, the presence of a Russian-language forum. At first I learned to interact with the app store, then gradually switched to synaptic, and then I started using apt directly in the console. I got used to the organization of the file system, figured out what lies at the root and which directory is responsible for what, in general, the very basics, solving various problems along the way. And they arose very quickly, just 15 minutes after installing and launching the distribution kit - the system just hung tightly. It was that quest. As a result, it turned out that the whole thing was in the drivers for the video card, the free ones were not very friendly with it.
When I got used to Mint and solved the main problems, I began to install other distributions in parallel, configure, try, feel.
So I became friends with Debian because there was more wiggle room. The scenario is the same as with Mint. In total, a couple of years on Debian, and here I am on Arch. I set it up from scratch, set it up, everything went quickly, I only moved to it for a long time, due to emotional attachment to Debian, after all, 2 years of use.
I will say this, when you understand what Linux is and what it is responsible for, then there will no longer be big problems with almost any distribution, the main thing is to be able to search for information and adapt it to a specific distribution. The basics and principles remain the same, only the commands, package names, and syntax change. That's all.
I started out using the gui, but over time it turned out that I use and prefer the terminal more. Setting up and editing system files takes place in the terminal, updating in the terminal, even part of the file operations in the terminal, I turn off, restart the PC also in the terminal. I never imagined that I would use it so much. It turns out this is a very handy tool. Let's say, to see a smart hard drive, it's easier for me to type a command in the terminal than to climb into the application menu and look for a program. Something like that.
So build an opinion about distributions not on someone else's opinion, but on your own experience, because no one will decide what is best for you, except you.

Answer 3

Which Linux is worth installing for mastering?

According to which there is a guru nearby.
If there is no guru and you don't want to fuck - bubuntu.
If some fucking doesn't scare - debian
If a lot of fucking doesn't scare - arch/calc/gentu :) (but really there will be a lot of fucking and a lot of reading mana and other documentation)

Answer 4

why the new Ubuntu does not come to people, because there are a lot of bad comments

Positive comment about Arch:
Positive feedback about Kali:
A negative comment about Ubuntu:
"Damn, I've been working in it for a year now and I just feel - no, this is not how an ideal distribution kit should look like. Not at all. There's just nothing to choose from... Eh ..."

Answer 5

Gentoo, Slackware and Arch are cool distributions for cool professionals. It is better not to start with them (and even more so not from building your personal distribution from source codes).
It's better to start with a distribution that has a large community. There is more documentation for such distributions, and when contacting the forum, there are more chances to get an answer.
Given the above, two families remain:

• DEB based and
• RPM based .

This is Debian and its derivatives, of which Ubuntu and Linux Mint are perhaps the most famous.
As for Linux Mint... When a Debian user wants to ask a question, they go to the Debian forum. When an Ubuntu user wants to ask a question, they go to the Ubuntu forum. When a Linux Mint user wants to ask a question, they go to the forum... Ubuntu. It's probably hard to find someone who can answer questions about Linux among Linux Mint users.
It can be said that the Debian developers adhere to the principle "reliable software is software tested many times". But isn't it?
Debian always has four system variants available: oldstable , stable , testing and unstable. Unstable is essentially not yet a system, but a bunch of disparate packages; individual packages from unstable are transferred to testing after completion. The next stage of development is testing; it is already an operating system, but still requires significant refinement and correction of critical errors. When Debian testing has reached a certain level of readiness, it is frozen. After that, for several months, work on it is carried out in a special mode: improvements are not accepted, but only fixes of critical errors and vulnerabilities are accepted. When all critical bugs are fixed, testing becomes stable (this happens about once every two years); the previous stable becomes oldstable, and the previous oldstable goes into history (although its support continues for some time). At this point, stable and testing are the same,
Ubuntu is based on Debian testing (not stable), which in itself is thought provoking. New versions are released every six months. Compare: Debian testing becomes stable when all critical bugs are fixed, without reference to specific dates; the next version of Ubuntu comes out in April, respectively, in October, regardless of the degree of readiness.
releases Red Hat Enterprise Linux ( RHEL ) and Fedora. RHEL sells for a lot of money; the price includes a technical support subscription. Fedora is free, but it's a test system that serves as RHEL's proving ground. From RHEL source code, volunteers build CentOS; in fact, this is more or less the same RHEL, but under a different name and without a subscription to technical support. RHEL, Fedora and CentOS have a common community.
Debian stable and CentOS are more suitable for initial acquaintance.

Answer 6

easier to start

ubuntu
ubuntu
ubuntu
It seems like most of the complaints about the extreme versions of Gnome - someone does not like whistles, someone eats a lot of RAM. In general, you can change it to any other.
Doubtful.
Even more doubtful. For C++/C#, Microsoft has the best toolkit.

Answer 7

mint is definitely more reliable than ubuntu
and I will say this if
you want to dance with a tambourine, put any Linux, dancing is provided

Answer 8

on 16.04, many (including me) are sitting because it is LTS.
although, probably, it is already possible to upgrade to 18.04, but this is the time ..

Answer 9

Turning on the logic:
a programmer, but not a Linux programmer? then you need a minimum of time to communicate with the system: Debian, Fedora, Ubuntu, Manjaro (this is Arch without gimor), OpenSuse (what forgot her?)
Linux programmer? Gentoo, Arch, Slackware and more?

Answer 10

Oh, can I, can I, can I? :)
CentOS, don't disable SELinux :)

Answer 11

Do not listen to anyone. You need to start with the "correct" distro, where the main tool is the terminal, not the gui.
Your choice arch. Big community + good documentation. Its complexity is exaggerated.

Answer 12

openuse. tumbleweed if you want newer packages, albeit at some risk. Leap for stability

Answer 13

I always recommend Linux Mint. With him, the least fuss is at the start, everything is very well thought out there. And since Since it's built on Ubuntu, there are plenty of manuals on the web that will work for it.

Answer 14

Debian