Parrot has a “home” edition
Honestly just go with with something Arch based. It’s not nearly as bad as most people make it out to be. No need to rely on flatpaks or anything like that, no issues with finding packages at all due to the AUR. And I’m sure that it’s possible to figure out a way to make btrfs snapshots work.
I just wish Debian was like Fedora. I recently read in a thread that Pop!_OS ships with Latest kernel images. How about that ?
Flatpaks have (some) sandboxing and if they are from the developer, I much prefer that option over AUR
Yes but native packages can still be sandboxed, and it’s easier to apply apparmor profiles with native packages. Native packages overall should provide better security if the user is willing to put some effort.
Not a good out of the box experience.
Flatpaks are the future, but it will take some time for traditional packaging fans to realize it the same way it took some time for X11 people to realize that Wayland is the future and X11 should just die.
Linux Mint allows you to install newer kernels directly, no need for latest kernel packages. As for a Fedora-like update cycle with Debian base, I’m not aware of any myself.
Native packages do have a better experience in some cases (such as Steam flatpak being kinda borked iirc, LibreOffice flatpak only using GTK which makes it look horrendous, etc)
Yes, so does Pop!_OS. But problem is the DE. You can’t use DE you wish such as KDE.
Why not?
I thought of the official spin by the Linux mint team. So, I can essentially have Ubuntu base which is stable with required updates + KDE the one I wish, which is cool.
I thought I could only install the DEs only if they support as in Fedora where I have tried many DEs applied over my KDE and reverted back to KDE.
I guess that is fair. It’s better for you to stick to Fedora KDE spin for the update cycle then.
Actually, I hate the update cycle. I want fewer updates and a distro based on Debian, Stable. I think it could be possible now because of the idea you gave.
Stable and LTS kernels are different goals than Debian’s Stable which uses the 6.1 LTS kernel as of today, so opting for Debians Stable for all packages but with Linux Kernel Stable (or mainline) is a very specific goal.
I’m curious, if you want Debians Stable release cadence, why not just use Debian Stanle and install the kernel version yourself or look for a third party repo that manages it? Slightly more work, but solves the problem.
To be honest, I started using Fedora since PG recommended it. It is actually good, but there are some nuances I get through in it.
- My number one major issue is - Frequent updates, frustrating. Windows was better at it by giving updates on a per-month basis and security updates as needed. {Windows is now literal rubbish, I am glad, I left it. Windows 10 IoT Enterprise LTSC is good, I can use it. But a violation of licence agreement, and also it sends a lot of telemetry even when disabled via registry/group policy etc.}. I wonder what would I have done either in OpenSUSE or Arch.
- Bug filled KDE plasma and frequent crashes.
- PG’s page gave a fear that my system might be vulnerable because when I checked Debian packages page for Linux, there are a lot of vulnerabilities that aren’t fixed in the case of kernel itself.
- Then there are the apps, most are available in
.debformat, I hateAppImageformat and use it only when the dev doesn’t release in any other format for linux. - So, In the Ubuntu based distros, I loved Linux mint and Cinnamon. But I left it for KDE. But I still liked the LM project and their updated and a bloat free Ubuntu.
- And using Ubuntu base which is better than Debian in case of patching (my opinion not sure) + the latest kernel from mint and KDE plasma as I wish.
I am even considering switching back to windows. But KDE plasma is holding me back. If it was GNOME, I would have stepped back on day one itself.
I also considered buying a Mac, it’s too good but the hardware and price isn’t sustainable and efficient.
I could run the same device for 15 years or more with Linux. Recently, I found FreeBSD, I might consider it, if I like it. But I don’t know.
As of now, this seems to be a better way currently.
Maybe there should be some phrasing updates to PG. For security, you should have specific threats you are protecting against, and not lock yourself out of choices.
For privacy, any Linux district works. From what I gather you favor UX and reliability, so I’d definitely gear towards slow moving and popular distros and not worry about rolling releases - hence why you like Debian so much 
Unironically, I think Ubuntu (Kubuntu for KDE) might be a good choice. Ubuntu is super solid, you can uninstall the bloat of initial installs, and ignore the whole flatpack stuff. Otherwise, Debian with the stable kernel might be “good enough”. What do you think?
For Fedora, you could also simply choose to not upgrade for a bit. I often feel the need to upgrade every time I start the computer… but you don’t have to!
Wait to upgrade once every month rather than daily and give yourself a dedicated half day to fixing stuff. Better than having it randomly break all the time. I strongly encourage this practice, especially if reliability and time is a concern. If you are an upgrade junky, use Arch.
Yeah, that would help a lot.
Yeah, I actually want a distro that is like android but on x86. Just use it. Updates are done via store. Simple and work focused UI.
This community backlash and hate on Snaps by community, stuck on me like some contagious disease and I am hesitant towards ubuntu totally. And stripping things out of ubuntu would kill it.
Yeah, I did. But whenever I get 5G wifi network, I just like that update it. And yeah, restarting for a single 4KB update sucks.
More security holes, and fixing stuff. KDE crashes which is fixed by these updates but there are new bugs and crashes now then, I hate it even though I have telemetry on for them and send crash reports.
Hence why I think, Linux Mint + Latest Kernel + KDE because of being community based and the good security patches from Ubuntu and better AppArmor profiles.
Dude, I am hating updates because of fedora. Is it really sensical to suggest or sarcasm ?
Arch based distros are bleeding edge in updates. More likely to break, but always on the latest of everything. I personally recommend Arch if and only if you enjoy tinkering with your setup, otherwise it’s very annoying as you said. I’m an upgrade junky and can’t resist it plus I enjoy tinkering, so I use Arch for Desktop, but for stability it’s not my first recommendation. It was mainly a joke recommendation for your case 
Are these hypothetical security holes? I’d like to challenge this assumption that not upgrading every day leads to a critically vulnerable system. I’m not sure your threat model for security, but I highly doubt you are going to get pwned because you forgot to do a patch upgrade in a couple weeks.
For example take OpenWRT, it’s using an even older LTS kernel (5.15), and it handles all inbound and outbound network requests to my home. This is a huge attack surface, but it’s focused on reliability like a server to run on consumer grade router hardware.
Not saying you should install 5.15, or that you never need to upgrade, but perhaps thinking about what level of security you need may change approach in what distro you’d like. I think the assumption is you need the latest updates daily and super frequently, but what is wrong with weekly, or monthly?