So here's my situation:

I'm on Fedora 40 on a laptop and I've recently decided to add a Hibernate option to my own logout/powermenu script that I use. The script executes systemctl hibernate but there's a problem. It didn't seem to work. When I ran the above command in terminal, I got an error stating that there's not enough suitable swap space for that. Turns out that I'm using swap-to-zram hence why Hibernate doesn't work.

So, I decided to ask ChatGPT and it recommended creating a swapfile. I can do that no problem.

The thing is, if I'm using swap-to-zram, I concluded it is likely that if I'm making use of that swap-to-zram all the time, I will probably need a larger swapfile for the hibernation.

So I asked our AI overlords if there's a risk in that. It said there isn't any real risk, other than increased drive wear-and-tear and potential performance issues.

Dear Linux users of Lemmy, are there any issues or concerns I should be aware of before attempting something like this (running multiple types of swap simultaneously, excess swapfile space, etc.)? Thank you.

Edit: Not sure how relevant it is, seeing as I'm not asking about swap partitions, but I'll mention using BTRFS, just in case. And no, I don't know anything about it, I just know it has cool features I'm yet to start learning about.

You know what I just realised? These "universal formats" were created to make it easier for developers to package software for Linux, and there just so happens to be this thing called the Open Build Service by OpenSUSE, which allows you to package for Debian and Ubuntu (deb), Fedora and RHEL (rpm) and SUSE and OpenSUSE (also rpm). And then the dudes that do AUR packages can take a deb package and write a PKGBUILD that installs it on Arch and Artix. I think I just solved the universal packaging problem.

And maybe we can get OBS to add PKGBUILD support....

Also, feel free to let me know what you think about it as I'm genuinely curious: did I miss anything obvious? Thanks

Essentially as the title says, I'm running SDDM with the Wayland backend on Fedora 40 Sway edition and I want to enable tap-to-click for my touchpad. Any ideas on how I can do that? I tried doing it in the xorf config but then I realised the x server isn't even installed so SDDM is actually running on Wayland, and I don't know how to do that on Wayland with SDDM. Any ideas?

Edit: So if Plasma is installed, SDDM uses kwin_wayland, and the docs say that it normally uses weston. But what happens when neither of those are installed? Well, as it turns out, on Fedora Sway, they use Sway as the compositor for SDDM (probably to lower the ISO size). So imagine my delight when I did a sudo -e /etc/sway/sddm-greeter.conf and copied the tap-to-click (and keyboard layout for good measure) blocks of code from my old sway config to that file, saved and logged out. It worked! So yeah, the secret is in realising what compositor SDDM is using (and I think you might be able to force a compositor of your choice in the SDDM config, but I'm not sure how)

I'll try keep this short and concise.

I've been on Fedora for about 2 months now and it is one of the few distros to have all the packages I use (albeit, via COPR).

I recently read an article about Void and it seemed very appealing to me. I've been wanting to move onto something more minimal, and Void, with Runit and with its scripts that it ships with, as well as giving me a new init system and package manager to learn, seems amazing.

In terms of getting all my stuff on Void, their package search suggests all the packages I currently need are available for it.

Only potential sources of trouble are:

• Hyprland is an unofficial package

• Pywlroots and Pywayland (for qtile Wayland) don't exist, BUT there is a qtile-wayland package

• My broswer of choice, Floorp, will have to be ran as a flatpak, which may cause issues, especially performance issues, as I'm a serious tab hoarder.

I want to learn more about Void's systems by using them, but I'm not sure if the transition is worthwhile.

Is the bootup/shutdown speed, and faster package management really worth it? Is it really significant enough?

Now, I really like Wayland, and it's definitely better than the mess that is X11

BUT

I think the approach to Wayland is entirely wrong. There should be a unified backend/base for building compositors, something like universal wlroots, so that applications dealing with things like setting wallpapers don't have to worry about supporting GNOME, Plasma, Wlroots, AND Smithay (when COSMIC comes out). How about a universal Wayland protocol implementation that compositors are built on? That way, the developers of, say, wayshot, a screenshot utility, can be sure their program works across all Wayland compositors.

Currently, the lower-level work for creating a compositor has been done by all four of the GNOME, KDE, Wlroots and Smithay projects. To me, that's just replication of work and resources. Surely if all standalone compositors, as well as the XFCE desktop want to, and use wlroots, the GNOME and KDE teams could have done the same instead of replicating effort and wasting time and resources, causing useless separation in the process?

Am I missing something? Surely doing something like that would be better?

The issue with X11 is that it got big and bloated, and unmaintainable, containing useless code. None of these desktops use that useless code, still in X from the time where 20 machines were all connected to 1 mainframe. So why not just use the lean and maintainable wlroots, making things easier for some app developers? And if wlroots follows in the footsteps of X11, we can move to another implementation of the Wayland protocols. The advantage of Wayland is that it is a set of protocols on how to make a compositor that acts as a display server. If all the current Wayland implementations disappear, or if they become abandoned, unmaintained, or unmaintainable, all the Wayland apps like Calendars, file managers and other programs that don't affect the compositor itself would keep on working on any Wayland implementation. That's the advantage for the developers of such applications. But what about other programs? Theme changers, Wallpaper switchers etc? They would need to be remade for different Wayland implementations. With a unified framework, we could remove this issue. I think that for some things, the Linux desktop needs some unity, and this is one of these things. Another thing would be flatpak for desktop applications and eventually nix and similar projects for lower-level programs on immutable distros. But that's a topic for another day. Anyways, do you agree with my opinion on Wayland or not? And why? Thank you for reading.

Hello.

I have been a tiling window manager user, and a termincentric user for a while but one of the apps where I preferred to stick yo a GUI option was the file manager. I decided to use Thunar because of the thunar-volman extension which allows me to easily access the files on my external drives and USBs. That is pretty much the primary purpose for my file manager. The reason I chose Thunar is because I'm trying to switch to Wayland full time and as such, I wanted my file manager to not require xwayland, and pcmanfm will either have to be used in xwayland, or I'll have to find a way to theme QT apps as well, which I currently can't be bothered to do. The thing is, I've been experiencing some issues with Thunar, more specifically super slow load times (around 20-30 seconds) when switching between X11 and wayland backends. Now, I suspect fhis is a part of a broader issue with either gtk apps or XFCE apps (I've noticed the same issue with ristretto image viewer), but I digress. So I've decided that a good solution might be to switch to ranger, as it is one of the easier file managers to get into and feels intuitive to me. My question is: How can I get ranger set up to fulfill my main purpose for it: accessing files on different storage volumes? Any help or ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Alternatively, if you know about any good GUI file managers with few dependencies, that are widely packaged, follow GTK theming and allow fpr easy external volume management, I'd be happy to consider them and try them out.

Thank you.

Hi. So I've been a fish user for a while, but I've always gotten frustrated with it not being POSIX compliant. I tried to use zsh with oh-my-zsh to still benefit from fish's capabilities on zsh, but I had 2 problems with it: it was incredibly slow, and it wasn't as good. As I recently found out, the plugins can just be sourced in zsh directly, skipping oh-my-zsh, and fixing my speed issues. But the second issue remained: zsh-autosuggestions is just not as good as fish's autocompletion feature, which suggests commands in a user's PATH, as well as autocompletes directories, without me having ever accessed them, meaning they weren't even in the history at that point, which allowed me to hit the ground running. I want that with zsh as well. Is there a plugin or something like that, which allows for these extra features, and can autosuggest commands from PATH and autocomplete directories? I really want to switch to a POSIX shell, but the lack of this feature would make it feel like quite a downgrade. Thanks.

Currently, I'm a Vivaldi user. My issue with Vivaldi is simple: it isn't fully open source.

So what are my options? The obvious ones are Brave and Firefox.

But.

Brave has all the crypto crap, its sync feature sucks, as it doesn't even save all my settings, the mobile browser version of it sucks even more, because I couldn't find a way to access tabs from my laptop on the mobile client, and Brave mobile only supports the tab bar at the top (I want it at the bottom, phones are big, at least make them easier to use)

Firefox has the sync features, the mobile version supports tabs at the bottom, and sync is easy and works well, and on top of all that, it is either packaged by or preinstalled on most, if not all Linux distros BUT I have 3 issues with Firefox: Data collection is on by default (not that big of a deal, as it's Mozilla, not Google, the data isn't that much and can be turned off with a single toggle), Something very important for me is small tabs, and Firefox' tabs are MASSIVE. I just want small tabs that look like Brave's tabs, same colours, small and simple. And third, I want a better start page. Firefox' start page doesn't support custom backgrounds, and I want one that does. And preferably also has privacy statistics like number of ads and trackers blocked.

Lastly, it has to be based on Chromium or Gecko (Firefox' engine) so I can use all my browser extensions.

Is there a browser out there that meets all my criteria?

So I've been using Linux for about a year and a half, have been using Window managers since a few wweks in, have been using Wayland for the last 3 months or so, and have been using Hyprland for about a month. I love it and I want to stick with it in the long term, but I need a distro that supports it.

My essential needs are:

Hyprland NWG-Look (for gtk themes) CMUS Thunar Ristretto bemenu j4-dmenu-desktop (can build from source) Vivaldi (can use deb/rpm/extra repo)

My main issue stems from the fact that:

I want Stability. As such, Arch (and derivatives) are out of the question.

I don't like immutability. As such, NixOS is out of the question.

I'm concerned about the future of Fedora. It's where I'm at right now, yet the telemetry proposal, if accepted, would mean I need to switch.

If you have any other distros that fit my criteria, please leave them below. I know void can take care of all of these, except Hyprland itself and while River is available (and River is amazing) I would prefer to run Hyprland instead.