4 ms·

>Debian: slow to upgrade and doesn't support newer hardware zzzzzzzz This is said so often it's not even fun anymore. Debian stable is made for servers, for s

by pikzen 10y ago

>Debian: slow to upgrade and doesn't support newer hardware zzzzzzzz This is said so often it's not even fun anymore. Debian stable is made for servers, for stuff that's not going to move for ten years and is supposed to be up 99.9999% of the time. Run testing and your problems are solved. Recent hardware is supported, relatively recent versions of all software are in the repositories, depending on the maintainer. Or run unstable if you're feeling adventurous

mmgutz 10y ago
Agree it's made for servers. Great for older machines. Too often I've run into old libraries when I want to use a recent desktop app. I'm not knocking Debian but its kernel is older, dependencies are older. Great for stability. Ubuntu (based on Debian as you know) IMHO is a better laptop distro.
- rhblake 10y ago
  That's what Debian backports (https://backports.debian.org/ https://backports.debian.org/) are for. Best of both worlds - run stable as your base distribution, use backports whenever you need a more recent version of something. E.g. Debian stable comes with kernel 3.16, but 4.8 is available as an official backport, should you need the (almost) latest and greatest. Just add backports to sources.list && apt update && apt -t jessie-backports install linux-image-amd64.
dfc 10y ago
Unstable is hardly adventurous. I have ran unstable for 15+ years as my desktop/laptop. I have never had more than a couple hours of downtime and no data loss. Things rarely break in unstable anymore, that's what experimental is for. Moreover apt-listbugs prompts me about bugs in any package I am about to upgrade. Seriously, install apt-listbugs and apt-listchanges. Unstable is not that adventurous.