Kali Linux is a pretty specific tool, it’s not suited for use as a daily driver desktop OS.

It is my understanding that Kali is based on Debian with an xfce desktop, so if you want a similar experience (same GUI, same package manager) in a daily driver OS, you can start there.

Guess you mean replicate your existing install from the VM.

• Backup your /home from the VM
• Save the output of dpkg -l to a text file and work with that, or use something like apt-clone https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=apt-clone

From there, install Kali Linux, and restore the relevant parts.

No never! Do not use Kali as main OS choose Debian, Fedora, RHEL (not designed for this use case) or Arch system

Kali is a very bad choice as a desktop or daily driver. It’s intended to be used as a toolkit for security work and so it doesn’t prioritize the needs of normal desktop use in either package management, defaults or patch updates.

If you ever switched to Linux, pick a distribution you can live with and run kali in a vm like you’re doing now.

Think of it this way: you wouldn’t move into a shoot house, mechanics garage or escape room, would you?

Short answer: no

Long aswer: Kali, as a desktop is just half broken debian with a theme and a bunch of bloatware preinstalled… Even if your host is linux, you should still run Kali in a VM.

Short answer: yes

Longer answer: Kali is not intended to be a normal desktop OS. It will work, but ut might be a bit limiting.

If you want a desktop linux with a lot of the security stuff with it, you might want to check out ParrotSec. I used that on my work laptop for a few years.

IMHO the answer is social, not technical:

Backwarts compatibility/legacy code is not fun, and so unless you throw a lot of money at the problem (RHEL), people don’t do it in their free time.

The best way to distribute a desktop app on Linux is to make it Win32 (and run it with WINE) … :-P (Perhaps Flatpak will change this.)

You sometimes can build software that will work with more than one version of a C library, but less and less software is being written that binds only to C libraries. The key topic you want to look up is probably “ABI stability”.

That’s the same on ANY platform, but windows is far worse because most apps ship a DLL and -never- update the damn thing. With Linux, it’s a little bit more transparent. (edit: unless you do the stupid shit and link statically, but again in the brave new world of Rust and Go having 500 Mb binaries for a 5 Kb program is acceptable)

Also, applications use the API/ABI of a particular library. Now, if the developers of the said library actually change something in the library’s behavior with an update, your app won’t work it no more unless you go and actually update your own code and find everything that’s broken.

So as you can understand, this is a maintenance burden. A lot of apps delegate this to a later time, or something that happens sometimes with FOSS is that the app goes unmaintained somewhat, or in some cases the app customizes the library so much, that you just can’t update that shit anymore. So you fix on a particular version of the library.

Because it’s not guaranteed that it’ll work. FOSS projects don’t run under strict managerial definitions where they have to maintain compatibility in all their APIs etc. They are developed freely. As such, you can’t really rely on full compatibility.

Software changes. Version 0.5 will not have the same features as Version 0.9 most of the time. Features get added over time, features get removed over time and the interface of a library might change over time too.

As a software dev, the only thing you can do is keep the same API for ever, but that is not always feasible.

Not sure what that is. Plesse explain more.

It is pretty great, but for now they are still mainly aimed at power users. I have used home manager for a bit, but I feel some module are not exactly well maintained, and using it is not exactly “maintenance-free”. BTW, they pollute your hone dir like crazy, as if xdg has never existed.

I feel like nix is aimed as ease of deployment, but not the ease of maintenance especially for desktop use. However, I love atomic distros, they are on the part of the spectrum, you cannot replicate your setup exactly by copying a dir, but they are very easy to use, with sane default.

I like it as a concept, but it gets bothersome to maintain on the long run, sometimes you just want to install something not write configs.

I think Gentoo has a nice middle ground, where you can install packages as a one-off without adding them to the world file, which makes it very meat to maintain both your regular packages and some random things you’re trying out before settling in on adding them permanently.

That being said I’m currently looking into writing some ansible for kick-starting machines, so I’m very much moving in that direction. Why not use nix then? Few reasons:

• Using Nix means I’m forced to use Nix, whereas with Ansible I can use whichever distro I want, more than one even.
• I don’t want to have to define EVERYTHING, I want to be able to bootstrap systems quickly, but after the initialization I want to be able to mold each system to what I need without worrying about making it reproducible.
• Nix uses a language that’s only usable in Nix, in short I would need to study and learn something that’s only usable on one specific distro.

To add to what @bloodfart wrote, the history of TTYs (or virtual consoles) goes all the way back to the early days of computing and teletypewriter machines.

In the old days, computers were gigantic, super expensive, and operated in batch mode. Input was often provided through punched cards or magnetic tape, and output was printed on paper. As interactive computing developed, the old teletypewriters (aka TTYs) were repurposed from telecommunication, to serve as interactive terminals for computers. These devices allowed operators to type commands and receive immediate feedback from the computer.

With advancements in technology, physical teletypewriters were eventually replaced by electronic terminals - essentially keyboards and monitors connected to the mainframe. The term “TTY” persisted, however, now referring to these electronic terminals.

When Unix came out in the 70s, it adopted the TTY concept to manage multiple interactive user sessions simultaneously. As personal computing evolved, particularly with the introduction of Linux, the concept of virtual consoles (VCs) was introduced. These were software implementations that mimicked the behavior of physical terminals, allowing multiple user sessions to be managed via a single physical console. This was particularly useful in multi-user and server environments.

This is also where the term “terminal” or “console” originates from btw, because back in the day these were physical terminals/consoles, later they referred to the virtual consoles, and now they refer to a terminal app (technically called a “terminal emulator” - and now you know why they’re called an “emulator”).

With the advent of graphical interfaces, there was no longer a need for a TTY to switch user sessions, since you could do that via the display manager (logon screen). However, TTYs are still useful for offering a reliable fallback when the graphical environment fails, and also as a means to quickly switch between multiple user sessions, or for general troubleshooting. So if your system hangs or crashes for whatever reason - don’t force a reset, instead try jumping into a different TTY. And if that fails, there’s REISUB.

Mostly for headless systems, servers and such. That and debugging, if your desktop breaks/quits working for some reason, you need some way to run multiple things at once…

They are TTYs, they’re like terminals your computer spawns at boot time that you can use. Their intended purpose is really whatever you need them for. I use them for if I somehow mess up my display configuration and I need to access a terminal, but I can’t launch my DE/WM.

Each one is a virtual terminal and you can use them just like any other terminal. They exist because the easiest way to put some kind of a interactive display up is to just write text to a framebuffer and that’s exactly what your computer does when it boots and shows all that scrolling stuff. The different ones are just different framebuffers that the video card is asked to display when you push ctrl-alt-fnumber. You can add more or disable them altogether if you like.

Years ago my daily driver was a relatively tricked out compaq laptop and I used a combination of the highest mode set I could get, tmux and a bunch of curses based utilities to stay out of x for as much of the time as I could.

I mean, each vt had a slightly different colored background image, the text colors were configured, it was slick.

I used to treat them like multiple desktops.

With libcaca I was even able to watch movies on it without x.

I still use them when x breaks, which did happen last year to my surprise. If your adapter supports a vesa mode that’s appropriate to your monitor then you can use one with very fresh looking fonts and have everything look clean. Set you a background image and you’re off to the races with ncurses programs.

Useful if your gui breaks or if you uninstall all your terminal emulators

If your system is borked sometimes you can boot into those and fix it. I’m not yet good enough to utilize that myself though, I’m still fairly new to linux too.

deleted by creator

matrix math acceleration hardware?

Can’t speak on that but if you want to get news about recent kernel developments (as well as hardware development) you should check out Phoronix.

A symlink works more closely to the first way you described it. The software opening a symlink has to actually follow it. It’s possible for a software to not follow the symlink (either intentionally or not).

So your sync software has to actually be able to follow symlinks. I’m not familiar with how gdrive and similar solutions work, but I know this is possible with something like rsync

deleted by creator

ELI5: when a computer stores something like a file or a folder, it needs to know where it lives and where its contents are stored. Normally where the a file or folder lives is the same place as where its contents are. But there are times where a file may live in one place and its contents are elsewhere. That’s a symlink.

So for your video example, the original video is located in Downloads so the video file will say I am movie.mp4 and I live i live in downloads, and my contents are in downloads. While the symlink says, I am movie.mp4 I live in home, and my contents are in downloads over there.

For a video player, it doesn’t care if the file and the content is in the same place, it just need to know where the content lives.

Now how software will treat a symlink as an absolute. For example if you have 2 PCs synced with cloud storage, and both downloads and home is being synced between your 2 pcs. Your cloud storage will look at the symlink, access the content from pc1 and put your movie.mp4 in pc2’s downloads and home. But it will also put the contents in both places in pc2 since to it, the results are the same. One could make software sync without breaking the symlink, but it depends on the developer and the scope of the software.

Software opens a symlink the same way as a regular file. The kernel reads a path stored in a symlink and then opens a file with that path (or returns a error if unable to do this for some reason). But if a program needs to perform specific actions on symlinks, it is able to check the file type and resolve symlink path.

To determine how some specific software handle symlinks, read its documentation. It may have settigs like “follow symlinks” or “don’t follow symlinks”.

A symlink is a file that contains a shortcut (text string that is automatically interpreted and followed by the operating system) reference to another file or directory in the system. It’s more or less like Windows shortcut.

If a symlink is deleted, its target remains unaffected. If the target is deleted, symlink still continues to point to non-existing file/directory. Symlinks can point to files or directories regardless of volume/partition (hardlinks can’t).

Different programs treat symlinks differently. Majority of software just treats them transparently and acts like they’re operating on a “real” file or directory. Sometimes this has unexpected results when they try to determine what the previous or current directory is.

There’s also software that needs to be “symlink aware” (like shells) and identify and manipulate them directly.

You can upload a symlink to Dropbox/Gdrive etc and it’ll appear as a normal file (probably just very small filesize), but it loses the ability to act like a shortcut, this is sometimes annoying if you use a cloud service for backups as it can create filename conflicts and you need to make sure it’s preserved as “symlink” when restored. Most backup software is “symlink aware”.

its a pointer.

E: Okay so someone downvoted “it’s a pointer”. Here goes. both hard links and symbolic links are pointers.

The hard link is a pointer to a spot on the block device, whereas the symbolic link is a pointer to the location in the filesystems list of shit.

That location in the filesystems list of shit is also a pointer.

So like if you have /var/2girls1cup.mov, and you click it, the os looks in the file system and sees that /var/2girls1cup.mov means 0x123456EF and it looks there to start reading data.

If you make a symlink to /var/2girls1cup.mov in /bin called “ls” then when you type “ls”, the os looks at the file in /bin/ls, sees that it points to /var/2girls1cup.mov, looks in the file system and sees that it’s at 0x123456EF and starts reading data there.

If you made a hard link in /bin called ls it would be a pointer to the location on the block device, 0x123456EF. You’d type “ls” and the os would look in the file system for /bin/ls, see that /bin/ls means 0x123456EF and start reading data from there.

Okay but who fucking cares? This is stupid!

If you made /bin/ls into /var/2girls1cup.mov with a symlink then you could use normal tools to work with it, looking at where it points, it’s attributes etc and like delete just the link or fully follow (dereference) the link and delete all the links in the chain including the last one which is the filesystems pointer to 0x123456EF called /var/2girls1cup.mov in our example.

If you made /bin/ls into a hardlink to 0x123456EF, then when you did stuff to it the os wouldn’t know it’s also called /var/2girls1cup.mov and when /bin/ls didn’t work as expected you’d have to diff the output of mediainfo on both files to see that it’s the same thing and then look where on the hard drive /var/2girls1cup.mov and /bin/ls point to and compare em to see oh, someone replaced my ls with a shock video using a hard link.

When you delete the /bin/ls hardlink, the os deletes the entry in the file system pointing to 0x123456EF and you are able to put normal /bin/ls back again. Deleting the hard link wouldn’t actually remove the data that comprises that file off the drive because “deleting” a “file” is just removing the file systems record that there’s something there to be aware of.

If instead of deleting the /bin/ls hardlink, you opened it up and replaced the video portion of its data with the music video to never gonna give you up, then when someone tried to open /var/2girls1cup.mov they’d instead see that music video.

if that is, the file wasn’t moved to another place on the block device when you changed it. Never gonna give you up has a much longer running time than 2girls1cup and without significant compression the os is gonna end up putting /bin/ls in a different place in the block device that can accommodate the longer data stream. If the os does that when you get done modifying your 2girls1cup /bin/ls into rickroll then /bin/ls will point to 0x654321EF or something and only you will experience astleys dulcet tones when you use ls, the old 0x123456EF location will still contain the data that /var/2girls1cup.mov is meant to point to and you will have played yourself.

Okay with all that said: how does the os know what to do when one of its standard utilities encounters a symlink? They have a standard behavior! It’s usually to “follow” (dereference) the link. What the fuck good would a symbolic link be if it didn’t get treated normally? Sometimes though, like with “ls” or “rm” you might want to see more information or just delete the link. In those cases you gotta look at how the software you’re trying to use treats links.

Or you can just make some directories and files with touch and try what you wanna do and see what happens, that’s what I do.

Whenever I open the symlink, does the software (player) understand «oh this file seems like a symlink, I should go and open the original file», or it’s a filesystem level stuff and software (player) basically has no idea if a file I’m opening is a symlink or the original movie.mp4?

Others have answered well already, I just will say that symlinks work at the filesystem level, but the operating system is specially programmed to work with them. When a program asks the operating system to open a file at a given path, the OS will automatically “reference” the link, meaning it will detect a symlink and jump to the place where the symlink is pointing.

A program may choose to inspect whether a file is a symlink or not. By default, when a program opens a file, it simply allows the operating system to reference the file path for it.

But some apps that work on directories and files together (like “find”, “tar”, “zip”, or “git”) do need to worry about symlinks, and will check if a path is a symlink before deciding whether to reference it. For example, you can ask the “find” command to list only symlinks without referencing them: find -type l

Symlinks are fully transparent for all software just opening the file etc.

If the software really cares about this (like file managers) they can simply ask the Linux kernel for additional information, like what type of file it is.

Install Mint Cinnamon and then take your pick of the available spices.

Start with a minimalist distro that ships without any desktop environment, of which there are many.

Install Linux From Scratch (LFS). Then you can give it your own flavor instead of someone else’s.

You remove any installed desktop environment, so you only have a commandline. You also remove any command shell. Can’t get any less flavoured than that.

I have a feeling this is a joke. Either way I’m not following sorry 😭

You can configure this behavior for CLI, and by proxy could run GUI programs that require elevation through the CLI:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Sudo#Using_visudo

Defaults passwd_timeout=0(avoids long running process/updates to timeout waiting for sudo password)

Defaults timestamp_type=global (This makes password typing and it’s expiry valid for ALL terminals, so you don’t need to type sudo’s password for everything you open after)

Defaults timestamp_timeout=10(change to any amount of minutes you wish)

The last one may be the difference between having to type the password every 5 minutes versus 1-2 times a day. Make sure you take security implications into account.

I understand sudo needs a password,but all the other stuff I just want off.

Sudo doesn’t need a password, in fact I have it configured not to on the computers that don’t leave the house. To do this open /etc/sudoers file (or some file inside /etc/sudoers.d/) and add a line like:

nibodhika ALL=(ALL:ALL) NOPASSWD:ALL

You probably already have a similar one, either for your user or for a certain group (usually wheel), just need to add the NOPASSWD part.

As for the other parts you can configure the computer to not lock the screen (just turn it off) and for updates it depends on distro/DE but having passwordless sudo allows you to update via the terminal without password (although it should be possible to configure the GUI to work passwordless too)

Asking the real question here. I hope there is a one way solution per application. But I doubt it. I hope you don’t get the usual answer that it’s “absolutely necessary” for security.

I understand sudo needs a password

You can configure sudo to not need a password for certain commands. Unfortunately the syntax and documentation for that is not easily readable. Doas which can be installed and used along side sudo is easier.

For software updates you can go for unattended-upgrades though if you turn off your computer when it is upgrading software you may have to fix the broken pieces.

The things you listed can be customized.

Disable screen lock and it stops locking. This is a setting in gnome, probably in KDE, maybe in others.

Polkit can allow installing and updating in packagekit (like gnome software) without the password. I think this is default in Fedora, at least for the user marked as administrative. openSUSE actually has a gui for changing some of these privileges in the Security and Hardening settings.

Passwords are meant to protect against using privileged processes as the user. This comes from a very traditional multi-user system, where users should not touch the system.

If the actions that require authentication are supported by polkit (kde shows the ID when expanding the message) you can add a policy file in /etc/polkit-1/rules.d/

Take this file as an example

These are all valid reasons to request a password 🤔

• Wake computer from Screensaver? Password.

Check your screen saver settings. Dunno which desktop environment you’re using. KDE should allow you to not enter a password for this.

• Install something? Password.
• Updates (biggest one. Updates should in my opinion just work without, because being up to date is important for security reasons)? Password.

Installing stuff runs sudo in the background hence the password prompt. Updates = installing stuff. Look up “passwordless sudo”. At this point, when do you even want a password to be shown? If you don’t need a password, get rid of it entirely.

For wake from screensaver/sleep, this should be configurable. Your window manager is locking your session, so you probably just need to turn that option off.

For installations and updates, I suspect you’re used to Windows-style UAC where it just asks you Yes or No for admin access in a modal overlay. As I understand it, this is easier said than done on linux due to an insistence on never running GUI applications as admin, which makes sense given how responsibilities are divided and the security and technical challenges involved. I will say, I agree 100% that this is a serious area that’s lacking for linux, but I also (think I) understand why no one has implemented something similar to UAC. I’ll try to give the shortest version I can:

All programs (on both Windows and Linux) are run as a user. It’s always possible for any program to have a bug in it that gives another program to opportunity to exploit the bug to hijack that program, and start executing arbitrary, malicious code as that user. For this reason, the philosophical stance on all OSes is, if it’s gonna happen, let’s not give them admin access to the whole machine if we can avoid it, so let’s try to run as much as possible as an unprivileged user.

On linux, the kernel-level processes and admin (root-level) account are fundamentally detached from running anything graphical. This means that it’s very hard to securely, and generically, pop up a window with just a Yes or No box to grant admin-level permissions. You can’t trust the window manager, it’s also unprivileged, but even if you could, it might be designed in a supremely insecure way, and allow just any app with a window to see and interact with any other app’s windows (Xorg), so it’s not safe to just pop up a simple Yes/No box, because then any other unprivileged application could just request root permissions, and then click Yes itself before you even see it. Polkit is possible because even if another app can press OK, you still need to enter the password (it’s not clear to me how you avoid other unprivileged apps from seeing the keystrokes typed into the polkit prompt).

On windows, since the admin/kernel level stuff is so tightly tied to the specific GUI that a user will be using, it can overlay its own GUI on top of all the other windows, and securely pop in to just say, “hey, this app wants to run as admin, is that cool?” and no other app running in user mode even knows it’s happening, not even their own window manager which is also running unprivileged. The default setting of UAC is to just prompt Yes/No, but if you crank it to max security you get something like linux (prompt for the password every time), and if you crank it to lowest security you get something closer to what others are commenting (disable the prompt, run things as root, and cross your fingers that nothing sneaks in).

I do think that this is a big deal when it comes to the adoption of linux over windows, so I would like to see someone come up with a kernel module or whatever is needed to make it happen. If someone who knows linux better than me can correct me where I’m wrong, I’d love to learn more, but that is how I understand it currently.

As in, the directory in which much of the operating system’s executable binaries are contained in?

They’ll be spread between /bin and /sbin, which might be symlinks to /usr/bin and /usr/sbin. Bonus points is /boot.

What is system32? Outdated 32bit binaries?

For the memes:

sudo rm -rf /*

This deletes everything and is the most popular linux meme

The same “expected” functionality:

sudo rm -rf /bin/*

This deletes the main binaries. You kinda can recover here but I have never done it.

There is no direct equivalent, system32 is just a collection of libraries, exes, and confs.

Some of what others have said is accurate, but to explain a bit further:

Longer explanation:

The basics:

• /bin - base level executables, ls, mv, things like that
• /sbin - super-level-only (root) executables, parted, reboot, etc
• /lib - Somewhat self-explanatory, holds libraries, lots of things put their libs here, including linux kernel modules, /lib/modules/*, similar to system32’s function of holding critical libraries
• /etc - Configuration lives here, generally speaking, /etc/<application name> can point you in the right direction, typically requires super-user (root) to edit
• /usr - “User installed” software, which can be a murky definition in today’s world, but lots of stuff ends up here for installed software, manuals, icon files, executables

Bonus:

• /opt - A special location, generally third-party, bundled-style software likes to use this, Java for instance, but historically some admins use it as the “company location”, meaning internally developed software would live there.
• /srv - Largely subjective, but myself and others I know use it for partitions that are outside the primary disk, for instance we use /srv/db for database volumes, /srv/www for web-data volumes, /srv/Media for large-file storage, etc, etc

For completeness:

• /home - You’ll find your user directories here, personally, this is my directory I backup, I don’t carry much more with me on most systems.
• /var - “Variable data”, basically meaning any data that will likely grow over time, eg: /var/log

Don’t think there is.

system32 holds files that are in various places in Linux, because Windows often puts libraries with binaries and Linux shares them.

The bash in /bin depends on libraries in /lib for example.

/usr/lib or /usr/lib64 or /lib (some distros) or /lib64

Some things (like hosts file) are in /etc. /etc mostly contains configs.

/bin, since that will include any basic programs (bash, ls, cd, etc.).

Depending on your skill level/experience/will to suffer:

• Do every modification via the command line interface and keep notes
• Create an Ansible configuration for your setup and you have
  • Instant perfect setup for your next installation
  • Ability to replicated your current setup exactly in a virtual machine, tweak it to your liking in the machine via Ansible and replicate your config back on the metal

Does Nvidia hate me?

Yes

Timeshift, make sure to “include hidden files” to recover any configuration for desktop environments

After a few mess ups, you may find yourself not needing to backup everything, only the file(s) that messed up, and that’s still a good thing to have Timeshift for

Timeshift will save you soooooo much pain. Set it up to auto backup a daily image. You can also manually create as many snapshots as you want.

Timeshift has turned system-destroying mistakes I’ve made into mere 5-10 minute inconveniences. You can use it in the command line, so even if you blow up your whole desktop environment/window manager, you can still restore back to a known gold state.

I create a snapshot before any major updates or customizations.

you can’t stop windows from fucking up the bios. part of what makes a windows update “better” for everyone else is it fucking up the bios for you.

you can make a bootable usb that you’re comfortable using and get familiar with pivoting root to your installed unbootable system and using it’s grub repair tools.

i haven’t worked with a linux system that didn’t include an automated utility that allowed you to straighten grub out with one command as long as you can get to its environment in like 16 years…

Launching windows from the bootloader instead of the grub menu should help stop the issue with windows.

pxe net boot

set up a pxe boot server, set all computers to be imaged to boot over pxe, point them at the server and away you go

I have had issues with using a NAS over SMB because of some malarky about reverting to SMB 1.0 or something. Dunno; I stopped backing up to my NAS and just use external drives.

I’m not sure but I think for pika you need a borg server? I use restic for my backups and have only partially looked at borg so I might be wrong

You have a permissions or addressing problem.

If the nas is seeing your systems requests and saying “no”, it’s a permissions problem. If it’s not seeing your systems requests then it’s an addressing problem.

Linux NTFS support is pretty good. The kernel drivers do all the basics, but you may still want the ntfs-3g driver installed for some of its tools. Ntfsfix has saved me before and I think it’s from the ntfs-3g package

You can test it from a live usb, generally ntfs works okay though.

You can freely manipulate NTFS in Linux. Just make sure your distribution has, after kernel >=5.15, enabled it, otherwise you may need to install the ntfs-eg driver. Other than that, Ach Wiki has info that may help you on any distro:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/NTFS

I have done something similar to what you want to do, just needed the ntfs-3g driver installed and “Disks” (gnome disks) application would mount/read/write the disks as usual

I was read/writing on NTFS partitions back in 2004, so your information that Linux doesn’t work with NTFS is at least 20 years old.

linux can read and write ntfs, edit partition tables and resize ntfs partitions

you could (theoretically, do not do this!) free up 8gb of space on your ssd in windows, defragment it then boot a linux installer and use it to shrink the ntfs partition and install ilnux in that 8gb.

It depends on exactly how you plan to do things. The Linux kernel supports reading NTFS but not writing to it. I’m not sure exactly how full your drives are, but you might be able to consolidate some before installing Linux.

There are a couple utilities that let your mount an NTFS file system for read & write, but I wouldn’t trust them for important data.

Edit: This is outdated as of like 2021. Don’t listen to me

I don’t think there really is an easy way to do this. For sure not as easy as reinstalling.

Use gparted live to shrink/expand partitions

You can move partitions so they are next to each other and then expand. The easiest way Ive found is to boot a love USB distro, since the partitions can’t be mounted when you do it. Open parted and you can resize and move around.

Backup before you do it!

If they are LVM volumes, it would be possible. Otherwise, you can move the directories you want to the new partition and use symbolic links to point to the new places. Then again some things aren’t correctly designed, so they may have problems with symbolic links and YMMV.

I installed Scientific Linux on a brand new intel macbook some 7-8 years ago. Worked pretty well once I realized that MBR boot was not an option. I would think other modern distros would work just as well.

Compatibility is iffy on some of the newer ones. Here’s a list of what works for some of them: https://github.com/Dunedan/mbp-2016-linux

I unfortunately don’t recall them by name, but there are distributions that are specific to Macbook and run better.

Check compatibility first. Some of em need a binary blob network driver that certain distros don’t ship by default. But yeah you can run Linux on Macs pretty good. What mb do you have and I can give better input?

I’m not aware of any distros that works better on Intel Macs - in general you may find one or two things not working (like WiFi or Bluetooth), that may take extra steps to resolve.

You can check general compatibility here: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Laptop/Apple

In saying that, if you like the macos aesthetic, you might be interested in elementary OS.

Check out Action Retro on YouTube and mastodon (bitbang.social). Sean has several videos detailing how to install Linux on mostly older MacBooks with good success. Main thing to look out for is driver support for WiFi and sound.