Why oh why do you select your Gnu/Linux?

Hi,

Just curious as to why some of you select a particular Gnu/Linux? I choose Slackware Gnu/Linux for it's UNIX-Like structures. At first it was the first Gnu/Linux with UNIX-Like characteristics that would provide me with UNIX-Like for my PC. I do remember getting PV's first Slackware. A good read is; https://www.linuxjournal.com/article/2750

With Linux kernel development in 91-92 then we got SLS then new work by PV on SLS that grew to Slackware with extensive work by PV development for Slackware. Quote:

From https://www.linuxjournal.com/article/2750 Linux Journal: Why did you decide to do a distribution? Pat: That's a good one. I never really did decide to do a distribution. What happened was that my AI professor wanted me to show him how to install Linux so that he could use it on his machine at home, and share it with some graduate students who were also doing a lot of work in LISP. So, we went into the PC lab and installed the SLS version of Linux. Having dealt with Linux for a few weeks, I'd put together a pile of notes describing all the little things that needed to be fixed after the main installation was complete. After spending nearly as much time going through the list and reconfiguring whatever needed it as we had putting the software on the machine in the first place, my professor looked at me and said, Is there some way we can fix the install disks so that new machines will have these fixes right away?". That was the start of the project. I changed parts of the original SLS installation scripts, fixing some bugs and adding a feature that installed important packages like the shared libraries and the kernel image automatically. I also edited the description files on the installation disks to make them more informative. Most importantly, I went through the software packages, fixing any problems I found. Most of the packages worked perfectly well, but some needed help. The mail, networking, and uucp software had a number of incorrect file permissions that prevented it from functioning out of the box. Some applications would coredump without any explanation-for those I'd go out looking for source code on the net. SLS only came with source code for a small amount of the distribution, but often there would be new versions out anyway, so I'd grab the source for those and port them over. When I started on the task, I think the Linux kernel was at around 0.98pl4 (someone else may remember that better than I do...), and I put together improved SLS releases for my professor through version 0.99pl9. By this time I'd gotten ahead of SLS on maybe half of the packages in the distribution, and had done some reconfiguration on most of the remaining half. I'd done some coding myself to fix long-standing problems like a finger bug that would say users had `Never logged in' whenever they weren't online. The difference between SLS and Slackware was starting to be more than just cosmetic. In May, or maybe as late as June of `93, I'd brought my own distribution up to the 4.4.1 C libraries and Linux kernel 0.99pl11A. This brought significant improvements to the networking and really seemed to stabilize the system. My friends at MSU thought it was great and urged me to put it up for FTP. I thought for sure SLS would be putting out a new version that included these things soon enough, so I held off for a few weeks. During this time I saw a lot of people asking on the net when there would be a release that included some of these new things, so I made a post entitled Anyone want an SLS-like 0.99pl11A system?" I got a tremendous response to the post. After talking with the local sysadmin at MSU, I got permission to open an anonymous FTP server on one of the machines - an old 3b2. I made an announcement and watched with horror as multitudes of FTP connections crashed the 3b2 over, and over, and over. Those who did get copies of the 1.00 Slackware release did say some nice things about it on the net. My archive space problems didn't last long, either. Some people associated with Walnut Creek CDROM (and ironically enough, members of the 386BSD core group) offered me the current archive space on ftp.cdrom.com. Linux Journal: Why did you call it Slackware? Pat: My friend J.R. Bob" Dobbs suggested it. ;^) Although I've seen people say that it carries negative connotations, I've grown to like the name. It's what I started calling it back when it was really just a hacked version of SLS and I had no intention of putting it up for public retrieval. When I finally did put it up for FTP, I kept the name. I think I named it Slackware" because I didn't want people to take it all that seriously at first. It's a big responsibility setting up software for possibly thousands of people to use (and find bugs in). Besides, I think it sounds better than Microsoft", don't you?

I have been using Slackware since then with the first release back in 1993. I still have the disk sets somewhere in storage (many versions). I do use other Gnu/Linux (mostly Live) at times for diagnostic purposes but most of my work is with Slackware Gnu/Linux.

So why do you choose your Gnu/Linux? Easy of use or just the latest greatest for bleeding edge?
:hattip: