Type of filesystem to put on USB storage, that is compatible with most OSs
I want to format a USB storage device from the terminal and I have found several formats to do it. It's the first time I'm going to do this and I have doubts. I want to do it well. I have these options and I want to know which one is convenient that is compatible with all operating systems.
# mkfs.vfat -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ntfs -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ext2 -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ext3 -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ext4 -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.msdos -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.vfat -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.xfs -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.bfs -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
linux filesystems usb
New contributor
|
show 5 more comments
I want to format a USB storage device from the terminal and I have found several formats to do it. It's the first time I'm going to do this and I have doubts. I want to do it well. I have these options and I want to know which one is convenient that is compatible with all operating systems.
# mkfs.vfat -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ntfs -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ext2 -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ext3 -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ext4 -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.msdos -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.vfat -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.xfs -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.bfs -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
linux filesystems usb
New contributor
1
vfat is compatible with most OS (even Microsoft's Windows). I can't remember the difference between it and msdos.
– ctrl-alt-delor
3 hours ago
I did not know that this format is compatible with all. Thank you @ctrl-alt-delor
– Stn
3 hours ago
A secondary consideration is the maximum file-size you want to store ... different fs' have different limitations.
– tink
3 hours ago
I believe you duplicated vfat
– Jeff Schaller
3 hours ago
I usually save temporary programming data. I found this pendrive in my room and I want to use it. On my laptop, I use Manjaro, on my other laptop I have Raspbian and my brother uses Windows.
– Stn
3 hours ago
|
show 5 more comments
I want to format a USB storage device from the terminal and I have found several formats to do it. It's the first time I'm going to do this and I have doubts. I want to do it well. I have these options and I want to know which one is convenient that is compatible with all operating systems.
# mkfs.vfat -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ntfs -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ext2 -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ext3 -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ext4 -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.msdos -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.vfat -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.xfs -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.bfs -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
linux filesystems usb
New contributor
I want to format a USB storage device from the terminal and I have found several formats to do it. It's the first time I'm going to do this and I have doubts. I want to do it well. I have these options and I want to know which one is convenient that is compatible with all operating systems.
# mkfs.vfat -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ntfs -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ext2 -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ext3 -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.ext4 -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.msdos -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.vfat -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.xfs -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
# mkfs.bfs -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
linux filesystems usb
linux filesystems usb
New contributor
New contributor
edited 2 hours ago
Jeff Schaller
38.7k1053125
38.7k1053125
New contributor
asked 4 hours ago
Stn
112
112
New contributor
New contributor
1
vfat is compatible with most OS (even Microsoft's Windows). I can't remember the difference between it and msdos.
– ctrl-alt-delor
3 hours ago
I did not know that this format is compatible with all. Thank you @ctrl-alt-delor
– Stn
3 hours ago
A secondary consideration is the maximum file-size you want to store ... different fs' have different limitations.
– tink
3 hours ago
I believe you duplicated vfat
– Jeff Schaller
3 hours ago
I usually save temporary programming data. I found this pendrive in my room and I want to use it. On my laptop, I use Manjaro, on my other laptop I have Raspbian and my brother uses Windows.
– Stn
3 hours ago
|
show 5 more comments
1
vfat is compatible with most OS (even Microsoft's Windows). I can't remember the difference between it and msdos.
– ctrl-alt-delor
3 hours ago
I did not know that this format is compatible with all. Thank you @ctrl-alt-delor
– Stn
3 hours ago
A secondary consideration is the maximum file-size you want to store ... different fs' have different limitations.
– tink
3 hours ago
I believe you duplicated vfat
– Jeff Schaller
3 hours ago
I usually save temporary programming data. I found this pendrive in my room and I want to use it. On my laptop, I use Manjaro, on my other laptop I have Raspbian and my brother uses Windows.
– Stn
3 hours ago
1
1
vfat is compatible with most OS (even Microsoft's Windows). I can't remember the difference between it and msdos.
– ctrl-alt-delor
3 hours ago
vfat is compatible with most OS (even Microsoft's Windows). I can't remember the difference between it and msdos.
– ctrl-alt-delor
3 hours ago
I did not know that this format is compatible with all. Thank you @ctrl-alt-delor
– Stn
3 hours ago
I did not know that this format is compatible with all. Thank you @ctrl-alt-delor
– Stn
3 hours ago
A secondary consideration is the maximum file-size you want to store ... different fs' have different limitations.
– tink
3 hours ago
A secondary consideration is the maximum file-size you want to store ... different fs' have different limitations.
– tink
3 hours ago
I believe you duplicated vfat
– Jeff Schaller
3 hours ago
I believe you duplicated vfat
– Jeff Schaller
3 hours ago
I usually save temporary programming data. I found this pendrive in my room and I want to use it. On my laptop, I use Manjaro, on my other laptop I have Raspbian and my brother uses Windows.
– Stn
3 hours ago
I usually save temporary programming data. I found this pendrive in my room and I want to use it. On my laptop, I use Manjaro, on my other laptop I have Raspbian and my brother uses Windows.
– Stn
3 hours ago
|
show 5 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
The answer to your question¹ is simple:
mkfs.msdos -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
Hoever, it comes with the following limitations:
- Maximum File Size is 4GB
- Maximum partition size is 2TB
FAT NTFS EXT[2..4] BTRFS XFS HPFS
Amiga x
MS-DOS, Win95, 98 x
NT, W2K, ... W10 x x 2
MacOS x 3 x
Linux x x x x x x
Note 1: You asked for maximum OS compatibility and that's the only answer as it is compatible with most OSes as it's one of the oldest and least capable file systems. (Not ALL OSes! E.G. C64 does not support FAT!)
Note 1: Commercial Tryware if you want write capabilities.
Note 3: Commercial Software if you want write capabilities.
add a comment |
Use NTFS.
FAT can be also OK, but for large files (> 4GB) you need at least exFAT. Also FAT can end in having all your files on it marked as executable, when viewed from *nix systems.
NTFS should be readable and writable by all major operating systems.
Only at some models of printers and scanners, which generally would support USB sticks as source/target, you can have bad luck with NTFS – these usually than need a msdos partition table (not GPT partition table) with the first primary partition formatted as FAT32.
So if you do not need printer/scanner support, use the whole stick as NTFS, else make a first small primary partition FAT32, and NTFS for the rest. To be on the safe side, use only msdos type partition table, not GPT, as GPT might only be supported by newer systems.
3
I would never recommend NTFS as a "compatible" filesystem. It is not writable by macOS, nor is it even readable by default on most Linux installations. FAT32 is preferred by far. File too big? Just usesplit
– Fox
52 mins ago
Mac isn't in the practical list of "all systems" buried in the comments. And I've not had a problem reading (or writing) NTFS on a Linux-based system for years now.
– roaima
8 mins ago
"NTFS should be readable and writable", but in practise is often not. The only OS fully supporting NTFS out of the box is Windows, the rest sometimes can read it but definitely not write it without extra (possibly commercial) software; due to, among other things, lack of filesystem specification and aggressive patenting attitude from Microsoft. The same applies for exFAT.
– ElementW
53 secs ago
add a comment |
I agree with this other answer. It's important to mention that Linux requires NTFS-3G to mount NTFS. It should be preinstalled/available in repositories for most distribution. But it's not very widespread in embedded systems.
New contributor
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Stn is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f491501%2ftype-of-filesystem-to-put-on-usb-storage-that-is-compatible-with-most-oss%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The answer to your question¹ is simple:
mkfs.msdos -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
Hoever, it comes with the following limitations:
- Maximum File Size is 4GB
- Maximum partition size is 2TB
FAT NTFS EXT[2..4] BTRFS XFS HPFS
Amiga x
MS-DOS, Win95, 98 x
NT, W2K, ... W10 x x 2
MacOS x 3 x
Linux x x x x x x
Note 1: You asked for maximum OS compatibility and that's the only answer as it is compatible with most OSes as it's one of the oldest and least capable file systems. (Not ALL OSes! E.G. C64 does not support FAT!)
Note 1: Commercial Tryware if you want write capabilities.
Note 3: Commercial Software if you want write capabilities.
add a comment |
The answer to your question¹ is simple:
mkfs.msdos -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
Hoever, it comes with the following limitations:
- Maximum File Size is 4GB
- Maximum partition size is 2TB
FAT NTFS EXT[2..4] BTRFS XFS HPFS
Amiga x
MS-DOS, Win95, 98 x
NT, W2K, ... W10 x x 2
MacOS x 3 x
Linux x x x x x x
Note 1: You asked for maximum OS compatibility and that's the only answer as it is compatible with most OSes as it's one of the oldest and least capable file systems. (Not ALL OSes! E.G. C64 does not support FAT!)
Note 1: Commercial Tryware if you want write capabilities.
Note 3: Commercial Software if you want write capabilities.
add a comment |
The answer to your question¹ is simple:
mkfs.msdos -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
Hoever, it comes with the following limitations:
- Maximum File Size is 4GB
- Maximum partition size is 2TB
FAT NTFS EXT[2..4] BTRFS XFS HPFS
Amiga x
MS-DOS, Win95, 98 x
NT, W2K, ... W10 x x 2
MacOS x 3 x
Linux x x x x x x
Note 1: You asked for maximum OS compatibility and that's the only answer as it is compatible with most OSes as it's one of the oldest and least capable file systems. (Not ALL OSes! E.G. C64 does not support FAT!)
Note 1: Commercial Tryware if you want write capabilities.
Note 3: Commercial Software if you want write capabilities.
The answer to your question¹ is simple:
mkfs.msdos -n 'dickEt' -I /dev/sdd1
Hoever, it comes with the following limitations:
- Maximum File Size is 4GB
- Maximum partition size is 2TB
FAT NTFS EXT[2..4] BTRFS XFS HPFS
Amiga x
MS-DOS, Win95, 98 x
NT, W2K, ... W10 x x 2
MacOS x 3 x
Linux x x x x x x
Note 1: You asked for maximum OS compatibility and that's the only answer as it is compatible with most OSes as it's one of the oldest and least capable file systems. (Not ALL OSes! E.G. C64 does not support FAT!)
Note 1: Commercial Tryware if you want write capabilities.
Note 3: Commercial Software if you want write capabilities.
edited 47 mins ago
answered 1 hour ago
Fabby
3,39611227
3,39611227
add a comment |
add a comment |
Use NTFS.
FAT can be also OK, but for large files (> 4GB) you need at least exFAT. Also FAT can end in having all your files on it marked as executable, when viewed from *nix systems.
NTFS should be readable and writable by all major operating systems.
Only at some models of printers and scanners, which generally would support USB sticks as source/target, you can have bad luck with NTFS – these usually than need a msdos partition table (not GPT partition table) with the first primary partition formatted as FAT32.
So if you do not need printer/scanner support, use the whole stick as NTFS, else make a first small primary partition FAT32, and NTFS for the rest. To be on the safe side, use only msdos type partition table, not GPT, as GPT might only be supported by newer systems.
3
I would never recommend NTFS as a "compatible" filesystem. It is not writable by macOS, nor is it even readable by default on most Linux installations. FAT32 is preferred by far. File too big? Just usesplit
– Fox
52 mins ago
Mac isn't in the practical list of "all systems" buried in the comments. And I've not had a problem reading (or writing) NTFS on a Linux-based system for years now.
– roaima
8 mins ago
"NTFS should be readable and writable", but in practise is often not. The only OS fully supporting NTFS out of the box is Windows, the rest sometimes can read it but definitely not write it without extra (possibly commercial) software; due to, among other things, lack of filesystem specification and aggressive patenting attitude from Microsoft. The same applies for exFAT.
– ElementW
53 secs ago
add a comment |
Use NTFS.
FAT can be also OK, but for large files (> 4GB) you need at least exFAT. Also FAT can end in having all your files on it marked as executable, when viewed from *nix systems.
NTFS should be readable and writable by all major operating systems.
Only at some models of printers and scanners, which generally would support USB sticks as source/target, you can have bad luck with NTFS – these usually than need a msdos partition table (not GPT partition table) with the first primary partition formatted as FAT32.
So if you do not need printer/scanner support, use the whole stick as NTFS, else make a first small primary partition FAT32, and NTFS for the rest. To be on the safe side, use only msdos type partition table, not GPT, as GPT might only be supported by newer systems.
3
I would never recommend NTFS as a "compatible" filesystem. It is not writable by macOS, nor is it even readable by default on most Linux installations. FAT32 is preferred by far. File too big? Just usesplit
– Fox
52 mins ago
Mac isn't in the practical list of "all systems" buried in the comments. And I've not had a problem reading (or writing) NTFS on a Linux-based system for years now.
– roaima
8 mins ago
"NTFS should be readable and writable", but in practise is often not. The only OS fully supporting NTFS out of the box is Windows, the rest sometimes can read it but definitely not write it without extra (possibly commercial) software; due to, among other things, lack of filesystem specification and aggressive patenting attitude from Microsoft. The same applies for exFAT.
– ElementW
53 secs ago
add a comment |
Use NTFS.
FAT can be also OK, but for large files (> 4GB) you need at least exFAT. Also FAT can end in having all your files on it marked as executable, when viewed from *nix systems.
NTFS should be readable and writable by all major operating systems.
Only at some models of printers and scanners, which generally would support USB sticks as source/target, you can have bad luck with NTFS – these usually than need a msdos partition table (not GPT partition table) with the first primary partition formatted as FAT32.
So if you do not need printer/scanner support, use the whole stick as NTFS, else make a first small primary partition FAT32, and NTFS for the rest. To be on the safe side, use only msdos type partition table, not GPT, as GPT might only be supported by newer systems.
Use NTFS.
FAT can be also OK, but for large files (> 4GB) you need at least exFAT. Also FAT can end in having all your files on it marked as executable, when viewed from *nix systems.
NTFS should be readable and writable by all major operating systems.
Only at some models of printers and scanners, which generally would support USB sticks as source/target, you can have bad luck with NTFS – these usually than need a msdos partition table (not GPT partition table) with the first primary partition formatted as FAT32.
So if you do not need printer/scanner support, use the whole stick as NTFS, else make a first small primary partition FAT32, and NTFS for the rest. To be on the safe side, use only msdos type partition table, not GPT, as GPT might only be supported by newer systems.
answered 1 hour ago
Jaleks
1,368422
1,368422
3
I would never recommend NTFS as a "compatible" filesystem. It is not writable by macOS, nor is it even readable by default on most Linux installations. FAT32 is preferred by far. File too big? Just usesplit
– Fox
52 mins ago
Mac isn't in the practical list of "all systems" buried in the comments. And I've not had a problem reading (or writing) NTFS on a Linux-based system for years now.
– roaima
8 mins ago
"NTFS should be readable and writable", but in practise is often not. The only OS fully supporting NTFS out of the box is Windows, the rest sometimes can read it but definitely not write it without extra (possibly commercial) software; due to, among other things, lack of filesystem specification and aggressive patenting attitude from Microsoft. The same applies for exFAT.
– ElementW
53 secs ago
add a comment |
3
I would never recommend NTFS as a "compatible" filesystem. It is not writable by macOS, nor is it even readable by default on most Linux installations. FAT32 is preferred by far. File too big? Just usesplit
– Fox
52 mins ago
Mac isn't in the practical list of "all systems" buried in the comments. And I've not had a problem reading (or writing) NTFS on a Linux-based system for years now.
– roaima
8 mins ago
"NTFS should be readable and writable", but in practise is often not. The only OS fully supporting NTFS out of the box is Windows, the rest sometimes can read it but definitely not write it without extra (possibly commercial) software; due to, among other things, lack of filesystem specification and aggressive patenting attitude from Microsoft. The same applies for exFAT.
– ElementW
53 secs ago
3
3
I would never recommend NTFS as a "compatible" filesystem. It is not writable by macOS, nor is it even readable by default on most Linux installations. FAT32 is preferred by far. File too big? Just use
split
– Fox
52 mins ago
I would never recommend NTFS as a "compatible" filesystem. It is not writable by macOS, nor is it even readable by default on most Linux installations. FAT32 is preferred by far. File too big? Just use
split
– Fox
52 mins ago
Mac isn't in the practical list of "all systems" buried in the comments. And I've not had a problem reading (or writing) NTFS on a Linux-based system for years now.
– roaima
8 mins ago
Mac isn't in the practical list of "all systems" buried in the comments. And I've not had a problem reading (or writing) NTFS on a Linux-based system for years now.
– roaima
8 mins ago
"NTFS should be readable and writable", but in practise is often not. The only OS fully supporting NTFS out of the box is Windows, the rest sometimes can read it but definitely not write it without extra (possibly commercial) software; due to, among other things, lack of filesystem specification and aggressive patenting attitude from Microsoft. The same applies for exFAT.
– ElementW
53 secs ago
"NTFS should be readable and writable", but in practise is often not. The only OS fully supporting NTFS out of the box is Windows, the rest sometimes can read it but definitely not write it without extra (possibly commercial) software; due to, among other things, lack of filesystem specification and aggressive patenting attitude from Microsoft. The same applies for exFAT.
– ElementW
53 secs ago
add a comment |
I agree with this other answer. It's important to mention that Linux requires NTFS-3G to mount NTFS. It should be preinstalled/available in repositories for most distribution. But it's not very widespread in embedded systems.
New contributor
add a comment |
I agree with this other answer. It's important to mention that Linux requires NTFS-3G to mount NTFS. It should be preinstalled/available in repositories for most distribution. But it's not very widespread in embedded systems.
New contributor
add a comment |
I agree with this other answer. It's important to mention that Linux requires NTFS-3G to mount NTFS. It should be preinstalled/available in repositories for most distribution. But it's not very widespread in embedded systems.
New contributor
I agree with this other answer. It's important to mention that Linux requires NTFS-3G to mount NTFS. It should be preinstalled/available in repositories for most distribution. But it's not very widespread in embedded systems.
New contributor
edited 49 mins ago
Fabby
3,39611227
3,39611227
New contributor
answered 1 hour ago
Михайло Оришич
113
113
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
Stn is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Stn is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Stn is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Stn is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f491501%2ftype-of-filesystem-to-put-on-usb-storage-that-is-compatible-with-most-oss%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
vfat is compatible with most OS (even Microsoft's Windows). I can't remember the difference between it and msdos.
– ctrl-alt-delor
3 hours ago
I did not know that this format is compatible with all. Thank you @ctrl-alt-delor
– Stn
3 hours ago
A secondary consideration is the maximum file-size you want to store ... different fs' have different limitations.
– tink
3 hours ago
I believe you duplicated vfat
– Jeff Schaller
3 hours ago
I usually save temporary programming data. I found this pendrive in my room and I want to use it. On my laptop, I use Manjaro, on my other laptop I have Raspbian and my brother uses Windows.
– Stn
3 hours ago