Interesting! The UI looks like it uses GTK for drawing widgets?

Yes, DO AS I SAY!

Same as any other font. Add it to ~/.fonts or /usr/local/fonts. You might also have something like font browser already preinstalled, and usually there’s an Install button

Windows on external USB drive, disconnected after each use

No surprises there, just the usual removed

No higher education, no certifications, just 10 years of experience on different IT job positions, raging from junior web dev to big DevOps projects.

In my experience (I’m in EU/PL) what matters most are actual technical skills and ability to demonstrate them on interview. I changed my job like 5 times and each time I aim for slightly more advanced work and slightly better revenue.

KVM + Qemu + libvirt + virt-manager = ❤️

It is actually easier and more friendly for more advanced and technical users. I switched to Arch from Ubuntu 12 years ago after dealing with yet another dependency hell and 3rd party repo breakage. I gave it a shot (which was easy as Arch had a tui installer back then) and was shocked how easy it is to get everything running the way I wanted it comparing to anything Debian-based.

Yeah, but it was so commonly used that it was also added to Wayland

rsync -a src dst

Two direct continuations of CentOS aiming for full RHEL compatibility

I had most of Ubuntu CDs starting from 6.06, I even remember 10.04 or 10.10 which was about the last one they were sending or soon before. I usually gave all of them away in school hoping someone will like it.

OpenSUS

Try jailbreaking to sideload apps first This looks useful: https://pangu8.com/jailbreak/ipod/

This looks like it’s specific for your version of iOS https://pangu8.com/ios-15-8-jailbreak/

Checkra1n even has Linux (and Mac) support https://checkra.in/

The thread is not about transferring files from Linux, but about flashing iPod firmware, replacing iOS with some Linux distro, jailbreaking or working around iOS not being able to sign in to download apps anymore.

I used Windows XP not for too long after switching from Windows 98. It was that time when Vista was just released and I knew this is not what I wanted to put on my brand new PC.

At the very beginning in early 90’s Linux adopted X11 implementation that was XFree86. It was obvious and pragmatic move, because Linux was UNIX clone with full POSIX standard compatibility, and X11 was already there for almost a decade. Porting it allowed for having graphical interface very early on (Linux started in 1991, X11 support was added one year later) and allowed all the contemporary UNIX software to be easily ported to Linux.

X11 however was designed with completely different needs in mind, as UNIX machines were mostly mainframes or powerful workstations and not home computers. It was about a lot of features that make no sense in this day and age (like network transparency, drawing primitives, printing capabilities, font rendering etc) and its design aged like milk. Xorg (that was fork of XFree86 started after license change) was implemented in a way that allows keeping compatibility for the time being with many issues being worked around and the old solution being effectively forcefully framed into modern use. It’s basically huge

Wayland started as an idea on how to do graphics on Linux (and other UNIX systems) without X, but it was never meant to be drop-in replacement. That being said, it’s vastly incompatible and the shape towards having Wayland desktops is long process of gradual implementation of new protocols to make it complete eventually.

Making Wayland possible took redesign of the OS itself. In old days, Linux didn’t think much about graphics and it was the monolithic X server that took responsibility of things like loading video drivers, setting screen modes or pushing stuff to video memory. Wayland was all about split of X’s features outside of X to gradually remove the dependency, so now the kernel has native system interfaces like kernel mode setting, direct rendering manager and so on. It’s not only Wayland taking advantage of it, as the same infrastructure is now used under X too.

Your experience wasn’t much different because it wasn’t meant to be. Desktops that are ported to Wayland are very good at abstracting things that are specific to both (otherwise completely different) display systems. You can gradually find about some things being different over time as you dive deeper.

There are certain limitations of X that Wayland doesn’t have:

• X cannot handle multiple DPI settings, so it is only possible to set one scaling factor globally for all monitors no matter their size/pixel density
• X could never properly handle multiple refresh rates for different monitors
• No way for proper HDR support on X
• VR is not really a good idea on X

On the other hand, X is very open to the user and applications, providing all sorts of information about opened windows and sniffing input globally by any client (focused or not) is a feature. In 1984 no one really thought cybersecurity will be important factor. So on Wayland:

• App can’t keylog keyboard presses or mouse movements unless its window is focused (global shortcuts are still unsolved issue, WIP)
• App can’t directly control its window position and size as it is only controlled by compositor (the idea is to introduce protocol for asking compositor on window positions relative to some area, it’s WIP)
• App cannot get image of screen or window (this is solved via PipeWire video capabilities and xdg-desktop-portal)
• Any GUI automation is compositor-specific, at least for now.

For those and other reasons (like availability of desktop environments and window managers), some still prefer Xserver.

You probably don’t want to put Linux specific stuff on NTFS, like programs data or especially games. If you want more universal solution, format it as btrfs and install the driver on Windows. Otherwise you may face problems with compatibility on the Linux side of things.

You can mount the drive on Linux however you want if you go with custom fstab, so sky is the limit how you’d organize it and it really depends on your intended use. Heck you can have multiple directories (or subvolumes) in it and mount them in different parts of your /

Yes, but it has netinstall and you can choose to only install the base system. You then boot to tty and apt install anything you want.

Beware, it’s much harder to get complete OS this way, and even with working DE you may still miss something like userspace drivers, firmware, crucial services like NetworkManager, bluetooth etc. You’re on your own with finding out how Debian works

Traditionally on Ubuntu-based systems, those packages get installed as dependency of a meta package that pulls the entire desktop experience, for instance on Ubuntu this is ubuntu-desktop (the default GNOME experience), kubuntu-desktop (the KDE Plasma experience) and so on. I believe this won’t be much different for Mint.

The consequence of uninstalling such package is removal of the meta package. You can totally do that, but then the dependencies (so the cinnamon desktop with everything that makes it Linux Mint) are due for autoremoval of no longer needed packages (so apt autoremove would remove it all) unless they’re marked as explicitly installed and needed by you. Unless they’re “optional” dependencies. It’s hard to tell precisely what will happen without access to actual Linux Mint, but in theory you can just cherry pick whatever you want from that big chunky meta package, or remove it all and only reinstall stuff that interests you.

I personally wouldn’t bother and just set my default apps to my preference and if the app menu is too crowded I’d hide them using something like Alacarte (old school GNOME menu editor). That way you know that full system upgrades wont cause any problems, and you effectively replace apps as you desire.

And it’s true that for lightweight system with only what I need, something like Debian or Arch would be much better. My experience is that usually modifying easy-to-use distribution is (while perfectly possible) more effort than building one from the ground up.