Tumbleweed versus Leap
As other have written, Tumbleweed is a better choice if you need access to the very latest stuff. For example if you want to use the very latest digikam photo editor, or perhaps if you a developer and require a desktop with the latest libraries or most recent python, or what have you. On the other hand Leap will have less churn and the applications will be older and possibly more stable.
I moved from Leap to Tumbleweed when I started to do more Linux based development, I need access to the latest stuff.
Tumbleweed kernel and nvidia
With nvidia, as other have written, there is the Tumbleweed issue of the uncoordinated release timing of the TW default-kernel and proprietary nvidia driver. For example, at the moment the proprietary driver is has not yet been updated for the current TW kernel 6.10, so updating or installing the driver does not work. Somewhat unusually, this has been the case for some weeks (there are unofficial DIY solutions). Normally, the delay is only a few days, and usually only affects major kernel bumps, such as 6.9 to 6.10 (6.9.8 to 6.9.9 is usually pretty risk free).
With TW there are perhaps three main approaches to working around kernel proprietary nvidia-driver mismatches:
- Use btrfs as your root filesystem, on a mismatch, rollback and stay on the current TW version, wait and do no distribution-updates until the driver is updated.
- Use anything you like as a root filesystem and just hang back if you see a TW release that contains a kernel with a major kernel jump, such as 6.9 to 6.10. Wait for others to jump in the water first and report back. Stop distribution-updates until any report problems are fixed (you might be still be able to selectively update things such as the browser).
- Lock the kernel, and possibly the driver. This has the great advantage that it does not hold up distribution-updates. As in 2, just wait and see before allowing the kernel package to update.
I used to do 2, which worked pretty well. I now use 3, which I like very much because I can choose to stick with a stable kernel/driver combo until I have spare time to consider what’s in the update. For 3, I would recommend the nvidia “hard-way” installer over the “easy-way”. The hard-way installer is actually pretty easy and includes options that might help if you’ve locked the kernel (and something like the gcc version has rolled on).
Some folk just don’t use the proprietary driver, I never tried that.
btrfs versus ext4
I think the rough edges have been knocked of btrfs, but it is quite complicated, and you should definitely be sure of how to do a rollback, how not to do recovery (avoid fsck I believe), and how to measure free space (df and du don’t tell the whole truth on btrfs). Perhaps also read up on the structure and exposed metadata. Although /home can live as a btrfs sub-volume, if you ever want to change distro’s or want to reinstall the OS, it might be best kept separate?
Personally, I’ve stuck with ext4 for root and home (each separately). It’s partially because it’s what I know, partially because it’s a lot simpler. I’m used to doing my own backups and recovery, btrfs would just add complexity to my own efforts.
When btrfs was less well refined I did kick the tires extensively in a virtual-box, I would recommend setting up a disposable experiment to practice with it. ( Link to my old Leap 42 btrfs notes that includes some explanation of roots structure, which has subsequently been simplified and improved in lapter version of Leap/TW.)
I’ve read that ext4 was more resistant to corruption due to power failure than xfs (but it’s been a while, so xfs may have improved).
