10 ms·

Debian 9.4 released

226 points by merraksh 9y ago

ergo14 9y ago
How is debian nowdays for setting up things like containers? I've tried lxc in the past few years ago and got it working but it was not a pleasant experience, templates were broken. I would love them to gain back more server marketshare.
- Jedd 9y ago
  If there's anything that's not covered under: https://wiki.debian.org/LXC https://wiki.debian.org/LXC I'm sure the maintainers would love to hear from you.
- chrisper 9y ago
  One LXD has been ported, it should become easier. However I am afraid it might still take quite some time. https://wiki.debian.org/LXD https://wiki.debian.org/LXD
- noonespecial 9y ago
  I'm a docker fan myself but Debian is all I use and it works just fine.
- juanmirocks 9y ago
  I use for nearly all my docker containers the distro Alpine Linux. It is much lighter. I commonly find that Alpine images use at least 300MB less disk than Debian ones.
  - muxator 9y ago
    I think he was asking about debian as a host
  - oweiler 9y ago
    For containers I'd suggest using Debian slim.
    - juanmirocks 9y ago
      Interesting, I didn't know about Debian slim. For comparison, I just found this blog post [1], claiming the following: > According to the docker images command, the debian:jessie-slim container clocks in at 88MB, compared to the full-fat debian:jessie container at 123MB. For reference, the ubuntu:xenial and centos:7 base containers are 130MB and 193MB respectively, where as the alpine base container is only 4MB, as mentioned in my post about the alpine base container. [1] https://elegantinfrastructure.com/containers/cotw-debian-jessie-slim/ https://elegantinfrastructure.com/containers/cotw-debian-jes...
      - amenod 9y ago
        This is always a dilemma for me... Alpine allows for really small packages, but I never got used to its packaging tools (and I don't feel confident writing Dockerfiles with it). A matter of practice I guess. Besides, Docker caches layers so if you're using some common base layer (like Ubuntu or Debian) it's probably already on the machine. So I usually write Dockerfiles as `FROM debian` and then later adapt them to Alpine if they're meant to be distributed.
        juanmirocks 9y ago
        Yes, I did like you before. But once I got used to Alpine, apk (its package manager), and ash (its shell), I feel myself at home. Furthermore, in most occasions I find newer updated software on Alpine vs. Debian. Also besides disk space, I really have no idea how docker manages memory, but my assumption (naive?) is that smaller images will consume less RAM memory. I didn’t benchmark this though.
        amenod 9y ago
        Sorry for late reply. Depends on what is in the package. Docker is just a thin separation of processes, so the situation is very similar to size of packages on host Linux OS. What matters is the size of binaries and loaded data, which I guess is not that different between distributions.
- e12e 9y ago
  Docker-ce from upstream docker works well on Debian. I've not looked at "naked" lxc for quite some time - but I've used Lxd on Ubuntu a bit, and that's a great experience. If what you want is "containers" (single-purpose, ephemeral) - I'd say for now the docker tooling is best. But there's not much isolation - there lxc is better. I've yet to try alternative "run times" like rkt - but I believe that's the better way forward compared to docker. For now we use docker mostly for packing up an application and managing dependencies - not for resource/security isolation. I suggest reading over : https://coreos.com/rkt/docs/latest/rkt-vs-other-projects.html#rkt-vs-docker https://coreos.com/rkt/docs/latest/rkt-vs-other-projects.htm...
- krutzger 9y ago
  Have you tried this? https://linuxcontainers.org/lxd/getting-started-cli/ https://linuxcontainers.org/lxd/getting-started-cli/ If you are an lxd fan you probably want to move to Ubuntu or maybe even Ubuntu core.
hyper_reality 9y ago
The fact that the vast majority of these bugfixes and CVEs are minor is a testament to the continuing stability and quality of Debian and its ecosystem. I've run Debian on several machines for years and have upgraded confidently without a hitch. A big thank you to the maintainers and developers for making this possible.
- krutzger 9y ago
  Debian is like Arch but the opposite
  - Accacin 9y ago
    Old and tired meme. I've been running Arch for about three years now and I've had one very minor problem when I didn't read the notes properly.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - rvense 9y ago
    Not enough data points to really count, but I have had a lot of bad experiences with Debian updates failing or suddenly deciding that vim conflicts with something so it has to remove half my packages... Arch, however, has always been dependable in the five-odd years I've run it full time. Including machines that don't get upgraded for many months at a time. I don't know if I'd put in on a "server" that I ran for other people, but personally I have yet to see problems arising from the rolling release model.
  - stinkytaco 9y ago
    If only Debian had the documentation that Arch does. I know there's man and help, but the Debian wiki seems sparse and out of date, where the Arch wiki is incredibly thorough. Sometimes I find myself at the Arch wiki to do things in Debian, but that doesn't always work. So I generally stick to Fedora, which at least sticks close to upstream.
    - 9y ago
mariusmg 9y ago
Thumbs up for Debian, the workhorse of the entire Linux ecosystem.
ausjke 9y ago
Debian for server, definitely. Ubuntu for desktop, which is similar to Debian. Openwrt for devices that has limited RAM. FreeRTOS for MCUs with real-time needs. That covers the universe for me, enjoy them all.
- shp0ngle 9y ago
  I started installing Debian on desktop. It is far more stable than Ubuntu. And if you install the non-free Debian, there are usually no issues with wifi or graphic drivers (you need the non-free version though). There was time where Ubuntu on desktop made sense, but now Debian is just better and more stable.
  - simula67 9y ago
    Has things changed ? Debian stable was too old and testing used to break something every time I updated. I moved to ArchLinux since then
    - tetraodonpuffer 9y ago
      From my perspective the mindset with Debian is that distribution packages are never going to be the super latest, but are going to usually work well. If I need something bleeding edge it's straightforward to just download the source from wherever and install it myself with stow in /usr/local, which makes it easy to remove/upgrade if needed. I anyways do pretty much everything in VMs, so package availability for my "base" system (which I mostly use only to run VMs) is not that big of a deal. If I need bleeding edge I can always spin up an arch linux VM...
    - nerdponx 9y ago
      Been running Debian with XFCE on Testing lately. No problems here.
    - eadmund 9y ago
      Debian stable has never been terribly old for several generations now. Does what you do with your computer matter? Then you probably want to consider doing it on a stable platform. Do you want to experiment? Sure thing, have fun — but be aware that you may lose data as a result. Debian stable has been an excellent platform for me for the better part of a decade. But I'm unafraid to install newer version of some software where appropriate (e.g. emacs, or graphics drivers).
fosco 9y ago
I realize the decision is said and done but can anyone share in easy to understand terms what the big deal is with systemd?
- dsr_ 9y ago
  Systemd is an init system that tries to do everything: system init, hardware monitoring to load drivers on demand, configure networking, rerun failed jobs, service management, and it comes with a binary-format logger. The claimed advantages of systemd are mostly relevant, IMHO, for mobile devices that change configuration often. It brings no particular advantage to servers or desktops, unless you tend to swap out lots of peripherals on your desktop. The disadvantages are partially political -- systemd tries to take over every job it can; the originator has made it clear that his vision is for every system function to be handled by systemd -- and partially philosophical: it used to be the case that most subsystems were independent of each other, so that they could be replaced more or less easily if the sysadmin had different needs. The current stable Debian still makes it possible to run a different init system with just a line of package installation and a reboot.
  - chimeracoder 9y ago
    > The claimed advantages of systemd are mostly relevant, IMHO, for mobile devices that change configuration often. It brings no particular advantage to servers or desktops, unless you tend to swap out lots of peripherals on your desktop. Systemd provides huge advantages for administering desktops and servers as well. I'd actually go so far as to say those are the main reasons that systemd won (it's the default init system for all of the top ten Linux distributions by marketshare).
    - gsaga 9y ago
      >Systemd provides huge advantages for administering desktops and servers as well Can you list some of them?
      - oblio 9y ago
teddyh 9y ago
Please note: Starting with Debian 7, the minor number is not part of the Debian release number, and numbers with a minor component like 8.7 or 9.4 now indicate a point release. Basically, only security updates and major bug fixes, with new updated installation media images. This, 9.4, is not a new major release of Debian.
keithpeter 9y ago
Debian servers and mirrors still showing 9.3 (UK, 17:45 Saturday 10th March) I just downloaded v9.3 DVD1/2 to make an offline installation. Anyone know where the 9.4 upgrade iso is?
squarefoot 9y ago
Obligatory reference to the list of platforms Debian has been ported to and the "blends" it can be customized to. https://www.debian.org/ports/index.en.html https://www.debian.org/ports/index.en.html https://www.debian.org/blends/ https://www.debian.org/blends/ BTW, many moons ago I used Red Hat on Alphas, so I know it's not the only one. Still it's impressive.
facorreia 9y ago
I'm a bit surprised that the Docker image is not released as part of the same release process. They seem to be released by a separate project / org called "debuerreotype"[1]. [1] https://github.com/debuerreotype/debuerreotype https://github.com/debuerreotype/debuerreotype
jordigh 9y ago
Can someone explain this to me? I've had an issue with Postgres on Debian stable because Postgres had to address a CVE which changed its dump format in a backwards-incompatible way. This meant that my local Debian on my laptop couldn't load a dump I created on a patched Ubuntu server. Postgres 9.6.8 is the one that fixes this CVE in the 9.6 series. This says the stable package is still vulnerable: https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2018-1058 https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2018-1058 But Postgres doesn't show up here: https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/status/release/stable https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/status/release/s... The 9.6.8 version indeed isn't on stable yet. So is the latter link just buggy? Or is Postgres getting filtered out? Edit: Never mind, after messing with the filter (guess there's no Debian Security Advisory for this CVE), I was able to get Postgres in the second link: https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/status/release/stable?filter=1&filter=unassigned_urgency&filter=nodsa https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/status/release/s...
- eikenberry 9y ago
  On that later page, if you check "include issues tagged <no-dsa>" that Postgres issue shows up.
  - jordigh 9y ago
    So this has taught me something I didn't know about all Debian: not all CVEs have the same priority or have to be fixed in point releases. Many CVEs don't even get acknowledged by a Debian Security Advisory at all. I guess if I want security to be the utmost priority, I should be using OpenBSD.
    - anarazel 9y ago
      In this case you probably should just be using postgres' apt repository, which'll carry new releases very promptly.
      - jordigh 9y ago
passthejoe 9y ago
Depending on your use case, Debian Stable can be a great thing. If it worked great on a given computer (i.e. everything works), and I was just writing or using programs that were themselves fairly "stable," then it will work. If you're a developer and don't mind older packages, or if you install and manage your dev tools from outside the distribution, it can also work for you. This is a lot of people. But if you rely on your distribution to provide reasonably up-to-date packages (and for better or worse, that's me right now), then Debian Stable might not be the right choice. When I do development in Linux, I tend to be more comfortable in Fedora, which is much more aggressive when it comes to updating packages during the life of a release. I'm not crazy about major upgrades every 6 months, though you can do it once a year if you wish. For better or worse, I think that Ubuntu + PPAs is the path of least resistance -- if you trust the maintainers of your PPAs, that is.
notyourday 9y ago
Frankly, I do not understand the fawning over Debian. It became the same kind of "try to be everything and do nothing well" distribution Slackware was. Up until 8 it was still good for servers but 8 brought systemd, which maybe has a place on a Desktop, but is definitely not anything useful for servers. Ok, so lets pretend it is a desktop. Oh wait, it is a desktop that does not contain the lastest video drivers? It is a desktop that does not contain seamless switch between free nvidia and proprietary nvidia?

226 points by merraksh 9y ago

How is debian nowdays for setting up things like containers? I've tried lxc in the past few years ago and got it working but it was not a pleasant experience, templates were broken. I would love them to gain back more server marketshare.

Jedd 9y ago
If there's anything that's not covered under: https://wiki.debian.org/LXC https://wiki.debian.org/LXC I'm sure the maintainers would love to hear from you.
chrisper 9y ago
One LXD has been ported, it should become easier. However I am afraid it might still take quite some time. https://wiki.debian.org/LXD https://wiki.debian.org/LXD
noonespecial 9y ago
I'm a docker fan myself but Debian is all I use and it works just fine.
juanmirocks 9y ago
I use for nearly all my docker containers the distro Alpine Linux. It is much lighter. I commonly find that Alpine images use at least 300MB less disk than Debian ones.
- muxator 9y ago
  I think he was asking about debian as a host
- oweiler 9y ago
  For containers I'd suggest using Debian slim.
  - juanmirocks 9y ago
    Interesting, I didn't know about Debian slim. For comparison, I just found this blog post [1], claiming the following: > According to the docker images command, the debian:jessie-slim container clocks in at 88MB, compared to the full-fat debian:jessie container at 123MB. For reference, the ubuntu:xenial and centos:7 base containers are 130MB and 193MB respectively, where as the alpine base container is only 4MB, as mentioned in my post about the alpine base container. [1] https://elegantinfrastructure.com/containers/cotw-debian-jessie-slim/ https://elegantinfrastructure.com/containers/cotw-debian-jes...
    - amenod 9y ago
      This is always a dilemma for me... Alpine allows for really small packages, but I never got used to its packaging tools (and I don't feel confident writing Dockerfiles with it). A matter of practice I guess. Besides, Docker caches layers so if you're using some common base layer (like Ubuntu or Debian) it's probably already on the machine. So I usually write Dockerfiles as `FROM debian` and then later adapt them to Alpine if they're meant to be distributed.
      - juanmirocks 9y ago
        Yes, I did like you before. But once I got used to Alpine, apk (its package manager), and ash (its shell), I feel myself at home. Furthermore, in most occasions I find newer updated software on Alpine vs. Debian. Also besides disk space, I really have no idea how docker manages memory, but my assumption (naive?) is that smaller images will consume less RAM memory. I didn’t benchmark this though.
        amenod 9y ago
        Sorry for late reply. Depends on what is in the package. Docker is just a thin separation of processes, so the situation is very similar to size of packages on host Linux OS. What matters is the size of binaries and loaded data, which I guess is not that different between distributions.
e12e 9y ago
Docker-ce from upstream docker works well on Debian. I've not looked at "naked" lxc for quite some time - but I've used Lxd on Ubuntu a bit, and that's a great experience. If what you want is "containers" (single-purpose, ephemeral) - I'd say for now the docker tooling is best. But there's not much isolation - there lxc is better. I've yet to try alternative "run times" like rkt - but I believe that's the better way forward compared to docker. For now we use docker mostly for packing up an application and managing dependencies - not for resource/security isolation. I suggest reading over : https://coreos.com/rkt/docs/latest/rkt-vs-other-projects.html#rkt-vs-docker https://coreos.com/rkt/docs/latest/rkt-vs-other-projects.htm...
krutzger 9y ago
Have you tried this? https://linuxcontainers.org/lxd/getting-started-cli/ https://linuxcontainers.org/lxd/getting-started-cli/ If you are an lxd fan you probably want to move to Ubuntu or maybe even Ubuntu core.

hyper_reality 9y ago

The fact that the vast majority of these bugfixes and CVEs are minor is a testament to the continuing stability and quality of Debian and its ecosystem. I've run Debian on several machines for years and have upgraded confidently without a hitch. A big thank you to the maintainers and developers for making this possible.

krutzger 9y ago
Debian is like Arch but the opposite
- Accacin 9y ago
  Old and tired meme. I've been running Arch for about three years now and I've had one very minor problem when I didn't read the notes properly.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- rvense 9y ago
  Not enough data points to really count, but I have had a lot of bad experiences with Debian updates failing or suddenly deciding that vim conflicts with something so it has to remove half my packages... Arch, however, has always been dependable in the five-odd years I've run it full time. Including machines that don't get upgraded for many months at a time. I don't know if I'd put in on a "server" that I ran for other people, but personally I have yet to see problems arising from the rolling release model.
- stinkytaco 9y ago
  If only Debian had the documentation that Arch does. I know there's man and help, but the Debian wiki seems sparse and out of date, where the Arch wiki is incredibly thorough. Sometimes I find myself at the Arch wiki to do things in Debian, but that doesn't always work. So I generally stick to Fedora, which at least sticks close to upstream.
  - 9y ago

mariusmg 9y ago

Thumbs up for Debian, the workhorse of the entire Linux ecosystem.

ausjke 9y ago

Debian for server, definitely. Ubuntu for desktop, which is similar to Debian. Openwrt for devices that has limited RAM. FreeRTOS for MCUs with real-time needs. That covers the universe for me, enjoy them all.

shp0ngle 9y ago
I started installing Debian on desktop. It is far more stable than Ubuntu. And if you install the non-free Debian, there are usually no issues with wifi or graphic drivers (you need the non-free version though). There was time where Ubuntu on desktop made sense, but now Debian is just better and more stable.
- simula67 9y ago
  Has things changed ? Debian stable was too old and testing used to break something every time I updated. I moved to ArchLinux since then
  - tetraodonpuffer 9y ago
    From my perspective the mindset with Debian is that distribution packages are never going to be the super latest, but are going to usually work well. If I need something bleeding edge it's straightforward to just download the source from wherever and install it myself with stow in /usr/local, which makes it easy to remove/upgrade if needed. I anyways do pretty much everything in VMs, so package availability for my "base" system (which I mostly use only to run VMs) is not that big of a deal. If I need bleeding edge I can always spin up an arch linux VM...
  - nerdponx 9y ago
    Been running Debian with XFCE on Testing lately. No problems here.
  - eadmund 9y ago
    Debian stable has never been terribly old for several generations now. Does what you do with your computer matter? Then you probably want to consider doing it on a stable platform. Do you want to experiment? Sure thing, have fun — but be aware that you may lose data as a result. Debian stable has been an excellent platform for me for the better part of a decade. But I'm unafraid to install newer version of some software where appropriate (e.g. emacs, or graphics drivers).

fosco 9y ago

I realize the decision is said and done but can anyone share in easy to understand terms what the big deal is with systemd?

dsr_ 9y ago
Systemd is an init system that tries to do everything: system init, hardware monitoring to load drivers on demand, configure networking, rerun failed jobs, service management, and it comes with a binary-format logger. The claimed advantages of systemd are mostly relevant, IMHO, for mobile devices that change configuration often. It brings no particular advantage to servers or desktops, unless you tend to swap out lots of peripherals on your desktop. The disadvantages are partially political -- systemd tries to take over every job it can; the originator has made it clear that his vision is for every system function to be handled by systemd -- and partially philosophical: it used to be the case that most subsystems were independent of each other, so that they could be replaced more or less easily if the sysadmin had different needs. The current stable Debian still makes it possible to run a different init system with just a line of package installation and a reboot.
- chimeracoder 9y ago
  > The claimed advantages of systemd are mostly relevant, IMHO, for mobile devices that change configuration often. It brings no particular advantage to servers or desktops, unless you tend to swap out lots of peripherals on your desktop. Systemd provides huge advantages for administering desktops and servers as well. I'd actually go so far as to say those are the main reasons that systemd won (it's the default init system for all of the top ten Linux distributions by marketshare).
  - gsaga 9y ago
    >Systemd provides huge advantages for administering desktops and servers as well Can you list some of them?
    - oblio 9y ago

teddyh 9y ago

Please note: Starting with Debian 7, the minor number is not part of the Debian release number, and numbers with a minor component like 8.7 or 9.4 now indicate a point release. Basically, only security updates and major bug fixes, with new updated installation media images. This, 9.4, is not a new major release of Debian.

keithpeter 9y ago

Debian servers and mirrors still showing 9.3 (UK, 17:45 Saturday 10th March) I just downloaded v9.3 DVD1/2 to make an offline installation. Anyone know where the 9.4 upgrade iso is?

squarefoot 9y ago

Obligatory reference to the list of platforms Debian has been ported to and the "blends" it can be customized to. https://www.debian.org/ports/index.en.html https://www.debian.org/ports/index.en.html https://www.debian.org/blends/ https://www.debian.org/blends/ BTW, many moons ago I used Red Hat on Alphas, so I know it's not the only one. Still it's impressive.

facorreia 9y ago

I'm a bit surprised that the Docker image is not released as part of the same release process. They seem to be released by a separate project / org called "debuerreotype"[1]. [1] https://github.com/debuerreotype/debuerreotype https://github.com/debuerreotype/debuerreotype

jordigh 9y ago

Can someone explain this to me? I've had an issue with Postgres on Debian stable because Postgres had to address a CVE which changed its dump format in a backwards-incompatible way. This meant that my local Debian on my laptop couldn't load a dump I created on a patched Ubuntu server. Postgres 9.6.8 is the one that fixes this CVE in the 9.6 series. This says the stable package is still vulnerable: https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2018-1058 https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2018-1058 But Postgres doesn't show up here: https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/status/release/stable https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/status/release/s... The 9.6.8 version indeed isn't on stable yet. So is the latter link just buggy? Or is Postgres getting filtered out? Edit: Never mind, after messing with the filter (guess there's no Debian Security Advisory for this CVE), I was able to get Postgres in the second link: https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/status/release/stable?filter=1&filter=unassigned_urgency&filter=nodsa https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/status/release/s...

eikenberry 9y ago
On that later page, if you check "include issues tagged <no-dsa>" that Postgres issue shows up.
- jordigh 9y ago
  So this has taught me something I didn't know about all Debian: not all CVEs have the same priority or have to be fixed in point releases. Many CVEs don't even get acknowledged by a Debian Security Advisory at all. I guess if I want security to be the utmost priority, I should be using OpenBSD.
  - anarazel 9y ago
    In this case you probably should just be using postgres' apt repository, which'll carry new releases very promptly.
    - jordigh 9y ago

passthejoe 9y ago

Depending on your use case, Debian Stable can be a great thing. If it worked great on a given computer (i.e. everything works), and I was just writing or using programs that were themselves fairly "stable," then it will work. If you're a developer and don't mind older packages, or if you install and manage your dev tools from outside the distribution, it can also work for you. This is a lot of people. But if you rely on your distribution to provide reasonably up-to-date packages (and for better or worse, that's me right now), then Debian Stable might not be the right choice. When I do development in Linux, I tend to be more comfortable in Fedora, which is much more aggressive when it comes to updating packages during the life of a release. I'm not crazy about major upgrades every 6 months, though you can do it once a year if you wish. For better or worse, I think that Ubuntu + PPAs is the path of least resistance -- if you trust the maintainers of your PPAs, that is.

notyourday 9y ago

Frankly, I do not understand the fawning over Debian. It became the same kind of "try to be everything and do nothing well" distribution Slackware was. Up until 8 it was still good for servers but 8 brought systemd, which maybe has a place on a Desktop, but is definitely not anything useful for servers. Ok, so lets pretend it is a desktop. Oh wait, it is a desktop that does not contain the lastest video drivers? It is a desktop that does not contain seamless switch between free nvidia and proprietary nvidia?