Free and open-source.

Receives regular software and kernel updates.

Avoids X11.

The notable exception is Qubes, but the isolation issues which X11 typically has are avoided by virtualization. This isolation only applies to apps running in different qubes (virtual machines), apps running in the same qube are not protected from each other.

Supports full-disk encryption during installation.

Doesn’t freeze regular releases for more than 1 year.

We recommend against “Long Term Support” or “stable” distro releases for desktop usage.

Supports a wide variety of hardware.

Preference towards larger projects.

Edit: I’m new to linux

  • darkl1nk@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Fedora, maybe?

    Edit to make my point:

    • It is free and open-source.

    • Fedora has a rather fast release cycle. It offers new versions roughly every 6 months, along with regular package updates.

    • Has been using Wayland by default since Fedora 25, so it aligns with your preference to avoid X11.

    • Allows you to set up full-disk encryption.

    • Doesn’t freeze its regular releases for more than a year.

    • Supports a wide variety of hardware and aims to offer the latest kernel and drivers.

    • It is a large project.

    • Qvest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also, not that it matters much, but it has a strong stance towards open-source software, not allowing closed software in its repositories. Although closed software can be installed by using RPMFusion

  • throwawayish@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Notably openSUSE Tumbleweed is a distro that satisfies all requirements while not being named yet by others. Apart from it, only Arch and Fedora are worth mentioning as distros that also satisfy all requirements (as some others have already noted).

    • Petter1@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Those three crystallize more and more to be my favorite distros

      (Have to try arch and Fedora yet, but what my friends have looks very good)

      • throwawayish@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m of the opinion that systems and packages should be current and I find little to no merit in using a derived distro for myself. For this, the aforementioned three distros and NixOS are just plain superior over all the others IMO. NixOS was absent from my original comment due to how radically different it is compared to any other distro. But it’s definitely worth checking out if one is not scared of learning a thing or two.

        • Petter1@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          😁i guess I’ll try nixOS on my current empty partition of my old iMac and see if the drivers work as well as they do with openSuse tumbleweed (they did very bad with manjaro and it killed itself twice in succession, lol)

  • tvmole@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe EndeavourOS (a convenient installer for Arch) with a desktop that supports Wayland.

    I run that with Gnome in Wayland mode on my desktop and with Sway (Wayland equivalent of i3) on my laptop and I’ve been very happy with that. You could also run KDE if you prefer

  • Ulu-Mulu-no-die@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think you would get more suitable recommendations if you told us what your use cases are. Did someone else give you those requirements? Are you new to Linux?

    Arch, Slackware current (KDE), Suse tumbleweed, Debian sid and Fedora tick all the boxes but I wouldn’t recommend Arch nor Slackware to someone who never used Linux before, nor I would recommend Debian sid for desktop usage (unless you know what you’re doing) because its packages are not controlled by their security team.

    Free and open-source. Receives regular software and kernel updates.

    All of them (desktop). The difference in updates is between a rolling release or non-rolling one.
    Rolling means they receive updates to software and kernels continuously as soon as they are released, you always have the latest versions but that could lead to instabilities, non-rolling (or stable) are updated less frequently so are more stable, which one to choose depends on what you need to do with it.

    Avoids X11.

    Fedora, Suse, Ubuntu, Slackware current, Debian, Arch, if you choose GNOME or KDE you’ll have Wayland as default AFAIK, probably others.

    Supports full-disk encryption during installation. Doesn’t freeze regular releases for more than 1 year.

    All of the above.

    We recommend against “Long Term Support” or “stable” distro releases for desktop usage.

    LTS is a version, not a distro. Distros that offer LTS versions also have a non-LTS ones, get those and you’re fine. Tho not wanting a stable is weird, they can be the best for desktop usage depending on what you need to do.

    Supports a wide variety of hardware.

    That depends on the kernel, all kernels support a wide variety of hardware, non-LTS versions are best for more modern hardware.

    Preference towards larger projects.

    All distros mentioned are large projects, Debian is probably the biggest, it also supports several different architectures.

  • throwawayish@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’ve already written another comment here. But I just noticed that you have edited OP’s text to include that you were new to Linux. Which changes the rules of the game so much so that a simple edit of my other post wouldn’t do it justice for the sake of visibility. Btw, perhaps you should have told us that earlier 😅.

    So previously I had named Arch, Fedora and openSUSE Tumbleweed. These distros are still definitely worth the trouble. However, instead of Arch directly, you might wanna opt to an Arch-based distro. They often come with an installation that’s done through a GUI, which you might perhaps conceive as being more intuitive. Though, there are some that argue anything Arch-related is not suited for new users. Personally, I don’t buy into that. But there’s definitely some truth to it in the sense that other distros might be better suited for some new users. We don’t know what ‘type of new user’ you are, therefore we won’t be able to answer that for you. However, my gut feeling tells me that you’ve got some potential to start out with (an) Arch(-based distro) right out of the gate. Though, I’m not very confident (yet)😅.

    With that out of the way, I think the following is important to note as well:

    • If you want to avoid X11, then you have to use Wayland. Which, in turn, implies that you’ve got to use either GNOME or KDE as your desktop environment. Unless, of course, you want to try out a tiling window manager (like Sway or Hyprland etc) right out of the gate as well. Which, again, doesn’t make it easier for you to start using Linux 😅. It’s definitely worth it eventually, but perhaps it’s better to not make it too hard on ourselves from the get-go. Coming back to GNOME and KDE, fortunately they’re very well-supported on the previously mentioned three distros. So you should be fine regardless. As to which of the two suits you best…? Well, that’s very personal. An oversimplified overview would be that GNOME is polished and ‘limited in regards to customization out-of-the-box’ while KDE allows you to customize to your heart’s content at the cost of polish. GNOME does have support for extensions that allows it to be easily customized beyond what KDE allows one. However, this comes -once again- at the cost of polish 😅. It’s best to make your own mind with this. Use both of them, and come to judge them yourself.

    • So I can’t but notice that you’re sensitive to your digital security (which is good thing 👍), but that you’d like your distro of choice to do the heavy lifting; which is totally fair. In that case, I would argue that Fedora and openSUSE Tumbleweed are better suited than Arch(-based distros), because they’re distros that take security very seriously. Heck, they’re the only popular ‘upstream’/‘independent’ distros that have managed to configure SELinux for use on their distros. On Fedora this is done by default regardless, while on openSUSE Tumbleweed it can be installed at a later point. (IIRC openSUSE Aeon/Kalpa (old MicroOS Desktop) shipped with SELinux by default, but the linked article suggests otherwise 🤔.) In contrast, while you can make it work on Arch, it’s not officially supported. AppArmor is still great though*.

    • If security is indeed important to you, have you perhaps considered using so-called ‘immutable’ distros? Btw, the name ‘immutable’ is not entirely correct as in most cases only some parts (mainly related to base system components) are read-only during runtime; changes to said base system components (through either installing/remove a package or upgrading) happens atomically and often times requires a (soft-)reboot to actually take effect. Some ‘immutable’ distros even manage to be reproducible and yet some actually manage to be declarative as well. The security-benefits for this can’t be overstated. If you’re interested in ‘immutable’ distros, then it’s worth mentioning that both Fedora and openSUSE offer them through Silverblue/Kinoite/Sericea and Aeon/Kalpa(/Greybeard) respectively. The exact implementation of ‘immutability’ across Fedora’s and openSUSE’s offerings are different. However, I won’t go over that for the sake of brevity 😅.

    Please feel free to inquire if you so desire!

  • SaltyIceteaMaker@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’d say Archl``inux

    Foss

    Bleeding edge updates

    Only uses X11 if you install it (same for wayland)

    Supports disk encryption

    Cannot freeze regular releases as there is only one wich get constant updates (rolling release)

    As stabel & LTS as you make it

    Supports latest harware

    Not quite sure what you mean with larger projects but arch is a minimal distro as in you have to install almost everything yourself