Can't we focus on why/how Linux rocks instead?

I'm not at all interested to be regarded as a Linux user just because "Windows is bad". It reminds me of all the ex-<insert religion/ideology>-crowd that somehow continues to identify themselves by their past affiliations. I don't think that's a healthy place to be in.

OP, I'll be honest with ya: if you're looking for something akin to M$ Defender but on Desktop Linux (and free), you ain't gonna find it.

A quick look at your Lemmy history suggests that you're security-conscious. In that context, it's worth noting that 'Linux' does provide you. However, depending on your situation and/or threat model, this might come at the cost of expertise.

If you never download random stuff from the internet, then your average distro might be sufficient as long as you commit to the most basic set of best practices.

However, if you do download random stuff from the internet OR if your situation and/or threat model warrants a more conscious approach, then things might change substantially.

But before subjecting you to Qubes OS, we'd have to know more about your situation. So, first of all, could you elaborate on your use case of ClamAV? Or, perhaps even what you intend to do in general?

Beyond none of its branches actually satisfying my preferences, I feel like the way it handles major version upgrades is way too involved. I suppose it makes sense; it's paying back the accumulated debt of a couple years worth of bliss...

Having said that, my experience on Fedora Atomic is (almost) equally blissful without requiring any of that whenever a major version update strikes.

Don't get me wrong; I definitely do believe Debian has its uses on desktop Linux. But I can't shake off the feeling that they're definitely more niche compared to say Fedora.

Can someone please provide a TL;DW? Much appreciated!

IIRC, it's another brain child of Mirko Brombin; the prolific designer that's also prominently involved with Bottles, Singularity Desktop/OS and Vanilla OS.

I wish it the best. Especially since Flatpak's sandboxing didn't have any competition up till now. At least, AFAIK*.

I frequently reinstall Linux.

Like, how many times in a year? And secondly, for what reason?

Unsure how I should respond to that 😅.

Anyhow, just to be clear, yours truly was responsible for every single letter, word, sentence, paragraph, punctuation (and whatever else I might have forgotten to explicitly mention).

LLM/AI was literally not involved in any part of the writing. Nor in the thought process*.

I made some changes using rpm-ostree related to zram and swap

Could you be more transparent and/or elaborate in this regard? Like, what did you actually do?

FWIW, I've been on Fedora Atomic since before Bazzite's existence, but I've never once considered using rpm-ostree to make changes to zram and swap. So, I'm a bit confused. To be clear, it's perfectly possible that what you did is 100% legit, but that it just happened to expose a gap in my knowledge.

I had assumed that, because I used rpm-ostree, the changes would become part of the “tree” and I could rollback to the original settings. But when I went to look at Bazzite’s rollback tools, it seemed solely focused on rolling back to previous official releases, and I couldn’t find any reference to the specific changes I made.

Basically, while rpm-ostree does offer git-like control on your base system; hence, why it's so powerful to begin with. It does not keep more than two deployments around; at least, by default.

If you would like to keep around a specific deployment (for whatever reason), you can do so with the ostree admin pin <insert number> command. The git-like control also enables you to keep track of:

• the changes applied to /etc; invoke ostree admin config-diff to see what files have been added or modified since installation
• layered packages; simply invoke rpm-ostree status

Keeping track is cool and all, but its usefulness is in full display with powerful applications such as:

• rpm-ostree reset; this basically removes all permutations. That is, two people on the same image, will have the identical base system after this. (Note that this still isn't as powerful as a factory reset. For that, refer to this issue tracker on bootc^[On that note, bootc's model is arguably better suited if you're just interested in finding back references to changes you made in the past. Granted, bootc offers a hefty amount of freedom in how you'd approach this and might be overwhelming for now. FWIW, both Bazzite and this are products of this.].)

Finally, the git-like structure ensures actual reversibility. On most other systems, installing A -> installing B -> uninstalling A will yield a different state than just installing B. With rpm-ostree, the base system between the two will be identical.

For completeness' sake, I've used "base system" above to just mean the contents of /usr and /etc (and maybe some other subdirectories of /). Crucially, the contents of /var are not part of the "base system".

Fam, with all due respect, perhaps consider to not rely on the AUR at all for the time being. At least, until you're genuinely confident in your ability to assess PKGBUILDs.

Arch is an OS that’s quite fully featured

Not entirely sure what you mean with that.

suited to veteran/power users

The gist is that Arch pretty much comes with little to no defaults. So, you are literally put into the position to make all the important decisions. Which, as you might have imagined already, basically requires you to be pretty knowledgeable on Linux in the first place. Thus making it mostly unsuitable for new users. Though, I won't dismiss a special breed of newb that somehow manages to rawdog it quite 'successfully'.

because it has regular updates

We refer to its release cycle as rolling release. Which basically alludes to the absence of a point release.

The version of Linux Mint you were on is 21.2 and you'll soon be on 22.3. After some time, you'll be on 23.x etc. These are referred to as point releases. So, whenever a new point release update hits, you'll receive a couple of months' worth of updates. And between two consecutive point releases, you'll receive little to no updates. So, basically, Linux Mint deliberately chooses to hold updates of. By doing so, it ensures you'll only receive updates that have undergone thorough testing.

Arch, on the other hand, has a much leaner testing phase. Heck, as pointed out earlier, it doesn't even wait for a certain moment to reach before it outputs an update. Instead, after the packages have had some testing, it pushes the updates out for its users to receive it. As such, you'll receive constant updates. And you're somewhat expected to at least perform daily updates. By doing so, it ensures you'll always have access to the latest and greatest.

Note that Arch is not the only rolling release distro. But, out of the 'Big 3'^[The others being Debian and Fedora*.], it's the only one that is rolling release by default.

Its release cycle does indirectly contribute to Arch being less newbie-friendly. Basically, any update comes with the risk of causing breakage. On Debian, this risk is partly mitigated by the infrequency of updates and by pushing out very well-tested updates to begin with. On Arch, you just have to deal with it every once in a while.

Note, however, that it's most often your fault and not Arch's. Secondly, after dealing with this a couple of times, you'd have acquired some excellent skills in troubleshooting.

highly mutable

Traditional distros are basically equally mutable. So, Arch doesn't (necessarily) outdo e.g. Debian or Fedora in this regard.

It has its own repo too by the looks of it?

It does. But that's a thing with independent distros. Linux Mint is a derivative of Ubuntu. Which, itself is a derivative of Debian. Debian, however, is independent. Similarly, Arch isn't derived from anything else; hence, it's an independent distro.

The list of independent distros isn't huge or anything, but I suppose there are at least a couple of dozens of 'm.

As for the own repository part, both pkgs.org and repology.org feature some resources on that.

I don't agree with the sentiment that Linux Mint is underrated either. As you note, it is quite popular and is mentioned a lot in the discourse.

However, I don't think that CachyOS and Linux Mint are the most popular distros; that undoubtedly goes to Ubuntu. And, if anything, I'd think that Linux Mint is more popular than CachyOS.

Yet, if we'd limit it to the distros used by gamers, then CachyOS probably does take the crown for most used distro (aside from SteamOS). At least, there are metrics that suggest as such.

I'd argue they'd have to answer (or at least think about) what their goldilocks is in terms of the following axis:

• No defaults^[That is, being required to set everything up by yourself.] <--:--|--:--> Highly opinionated^[That is, simply enjoy what someone else has decided for you.]
• Convenience <--:--|--:--> Security
• Rolling release <--:--|--:--> Frozen packages/repository
• Means to an end^[That is, Linux/OS/distro itself ain't that interesting; I just need it for XYZ.] <--:--|--:--> End in itself^[That is, I want to engage with Linux/OS/distro itself.]

hardened

This is an important keyword but perhaps not sufficiently discussed. I'd reckon focusing on it will be pretty helpful.

So..., what is it you want? Is it

• A. Make a fortress out of a very decent starting point? To daily drive it afterwards*.
• Or B. Daily drive a fortress built by someone else?
• Or perhaps even C. Something else entirely?

By the rest of your post, I'd bet on B. Which, puts us into an interesting situation...

systemd free

Assuming^[To be honest, I don't see any reason to not grant them the benefit of doubt. As far as I can tell, their lists look complete.] DistroWatch does a decent job at tagging/categorizing, there are only a handful of distros that are both systemd-free and tagged with "security". Note that half of these don't survive it upon closer inspection, which leaves us with Alpine, HardenedBSD and OpenBSD.

If you're well-versed into hardened distros, you'll note the absence of Linux' finest in this category; namely Kicksecure and secureblue. Their absence is due to their (heavy) reliance on systemd for additional hardening.

Furthermore, note that DistroWatch doesn't mention how well the likes of Artix, Gentoo and Void (among others) would function as excellent starting points to build your own fortress from.

Boot time.

While the landscape of 'atomic' distros may look thriving, we can distill the amount of mature projects to just NixOS, Guix System and Fedora Atomic (and their derivatives).

Most of the other projects found e.g. here are unfortunately not worth your time in most cases.

As for which one to go with, that definitely depends on what you desire out of it (in alphabetical order):

• Do you want something that's relatively easy to start out with? Then go with Fedora Atomic (or a derivative^[The images found under the umbrella of uBlue (which includes Bluefin) are even easier.]). From my personal testing, this one also seems to be the friendliest in terms of taking away many footguns.
• If two of the following strike a chord with ya, then you should heavily consider Guix Systems:
  • Enjoying/liking^[Or, at least finding it intriguing.] Lisp
  • Being passionate about F(L)OSS
  • Enjoying NixOS as a model, but being discontent with something^[Including, but not limited to, Documentation; DSL vs actual programming language; project governance.] that happens to be (better) (re)solved on Guix Systems
• NixOS is the OG^[To be clear, it's almost as old as Ubuntu.]. As such, there's a lot of cruft. But within that mess, somehow, ironically, it holds the potential for setting up the cleanest OS. As you can guess, without a shred of doubt, it is the most mature and most powerful out of the bunch. So, if you've got exotic places you'd like to go with your distro, then -in a lot of cases- this is the only viable destination.

FWIW, Lenspect is not capable of selecting a folder and scanning all of its contents^[Like what you'd probably want to do after extracting an archive.] (yet). For that (and more), there is vt-cli (source); maintained by (more or less) the same people that brought us VirusTotal. List of repos in which it's found.

I am most fond of Arch

But what is it that you like about Arch in the first place?

I found that I’m more comfortable with OpenRC as init and process management.

Like, do you want to limit your options to distros that are well supported by OpenRC? Or, is this simply a preference kind of thing?

the Artix forums also seem to house at least some transphobia

Do you want to engage in distro-specific forums or was your engagement in there mostly out of necessity?

as opposed to configured by me.

Excellent, so you're a builder/tinkerer that prefers a clean slate to work from.

in general: for my personal daily use pc. I download 🏴‍☠️ files and software for websites around the internet, so it would be nice have an antivirus

Aight. Understood. Thank you for the clarification!

So..., now it becomes a question of how paranoid security-sensitive you are 😅. I suppose relying on a distro with pretty decent security defaults (like e.g. Fedora or openSUSE) makes sense for a start. Furthermore, definitely commit to best practices^[A lot can be said on this, but it would dominate this text if I'd try to touch on it.]. As for the scanning part, other comments have already touched on that.

If the PC you're doing this contains sensitive information OR you're not satisfied with the provided "probably good enough" solution, then consider going "the extra mile". Which would involve the use of specialized OSes, relying on VMs and whatnot. But I digress...

in specific: i want to self host services in my home server, so i want it to be secure and protected

Unfortunately, I'm not confident talking on servers specifically. It's simply not something I've put serious thoughts to yet. I hope someone else will touch on that 😉.

Aight. Understood. Thank you!

In your case, I'd propose something like NixOS then. As your full system configuration can be contained within a (set of) config file(s), the very same ones you use to install/config stuff, a reinstall just becomes very easy. Heck, if you're willing to embrace the "Erase your darlings"-lifestyle, then I don't even think you'd ever feel the need for a reinstall. Because, frankly, the clean slate is just a reboot away.

EDIT: Perhaps Guix System is also worth considering as an alternative to NixOS*.

EDIT2: If you still want to explore other distros, then it's worth noting that nix, i.e. NixOS' package manager, is available on most distros and offers a lot of the benefits already. Like, you could configure your system using it, and then use that config on another distro to get your config back. Good stuff.

older computer

What are the specs?

Is there a way to just reset and do everything over like by repartitioning and installing something like Fedora or Ubuntu?

You mean wipe everything on your HDD/SSD and install something that can make use of all of its storage capacity? That's basically included on every distro installer.

I can’t get Ethernet or my VPN working

That's definitely not expected behaviour.

I want to be able to download “app” “installers” like you do with PC or MacOS.

What do you mean? Is it either one of the following? (Perhaps both are fine with ya?)

• Download software from a website and install it?
• Use a app/software store application in which you can find and install apps/software? This is basically what's found on modern phones.

What do y’all think of Zorin, should I still migrate to something more ubiquitous and longer-running?

Zorin OS should be fine~ish. The problem with asking the community is that they're often more interested in laying out their favorites rather than what would be closest to the objectively best option 😅. If, however, your problems with ethernet persist on Zorin OS while another distro's live ISO doesn't have that problem, then I suppose it would only make sense to switch.