3 ms·

> I really don’t need the newest of everything, especially if my hardware is working well this sounds dubious if one has, say, a web browser installed or other

> I really don’t need the newest of everything, especially if my hardware is working well this sounds dubious if one has, say, a web browser installed or other consumer-type software. you almost surely want the latest security updates (which are for better or worse often packaged alongside cosmetic or other performance updates) for a piece of software like this. for this reason i've moved to a releaseless distro. the idea that i can't get the latest firefox without upgrading my "operating system" version to a new release seems harmful for most types of software: - imagine updating an app required you to upgrade your iOS/android version - imagine updating a plugin requires updating your browser etc. it's anti-modular and so i can't support it.

octotoad 7y ago
Security fixes are backported to Debian stable release packages. Any respectable, production-ready, stable/LTS distro does this. Obviously you don't get the new features and functionality that may be introduced in an upstream major release, but security patches are covered.
- p1necone 7y ago
  The extra work (presumably it's non trivial) to do this could be spent on further hardening the current version if they didn't need to be supported though.
  - 0815test 7y ago
    Debian's current, supported version is the stable version. The reason why it's only released every two years and why it feels so 'old', is because it takes Debian Developers many months to "further harden" it before release. It wouldn't make sense to release it under a quicker schedule. Debian does offer "rolling" channels with prompt updates (testing, unstable) but those are officially not meant for real, production use.
    - p1necone 7y ago
      I'm not talking about Debian, I'm talking about the old versions of third party software shipped with Debian that have to continue being supported with security updates.
Scarbutt 7y ago
For Chromium, Debian Stable always keeps it up to update with the latest upstream version. for this reason i've moved to a releaseless distro. the idea that i can't get the latest firefox without upgrading my "operating system" version to a new release seems harmful for most types of software: Hehehe, that's exactly what "releaseless" distros like Arch do, you have to update everything to have the latest of anything (unless you want breakage).

octotoad 7y ago

Security fixes are backported to Debian stable release packages. Any respectable, production-ready, stable/LTS distro does this. Obviously you don't get the new features and functionality that may be introduced in an upstream major release, but security patches are covered.

p1necone 7y ago
The extra work (presumably it's non trivial) to do this could be spent on further hardening the current version if they didn't need to be supported though.
- 0815test 7y ago
  Debian's current, supported version is the stable version. The reason why it's only released every two years and why it feels so 'old', is because it takes Debian Developers many months to "further harden" it before release. It wouldn't make sense to release it under a quicker schedule. Debian does offer "rolling" channels with prompt updates (testing, unstable) but those are officially not meant for real, production use.
  - p1necone 7y ago
    I'm not talking about Debian, I'm talking about the old versions of third party software shipped with Debian that have to continue being supported with security updates.

Scarbutt 7y ago

For Chromium, Debian Stable always keeps it up to update with the latest upstream version. for this reason i've moved to a releaseless distro. the idea that i can't get the latest firefox without upgrading my "operating system" version to a new release seems harmful for most types of software: Hehehe, that's exactly what "releaseless" distros like Arch do, you have to update everything to have the latest of anything (unless you want breakage).