3 ms·

The more I use linux (12 years), the more I believe that common users should not use "stable distribution". Upgrade is risky, software is always outdated. It so

The more I use linux (12 years), the more I believe that common users should not use "stable distribution". Upgrade is risky, software is always outdated. It solves nothing and provides unjustified feeling of stability. LTS makes sense as deployment platform. Push it to server and deploy own application. Make a demo like subject NVIDIA Jetson Nano SDK and forget about it. There are better ways to help underpowered machines - use light desktop environment, block ads in browser, add RAM if possible. Kernel and base requirements has not changed much in a decade. About 120 MB with XOrg.

rektide 6y ago
this feels like mass cowardice to me. run Debian testing or unstable. run something semi modern. not old lame vendor LTS. those who cower in LTS land, thinking they are saving themselves from troubles have very very very little experience, scant little too contribute to the community that cares & tries to remain mildly up to date. there is such a prevalent fear based mentality about running decent reasonable modern upstream software but it is such FUD, such a cannot do attitude. rarely can these camps justify their afraid behavior. LTS is nonsense. testing, unstable, they work well, & they expose real honest levels of support for systems, versus relying on antiquated but known support that LTS brings the tepid adopters.
- sergeykish 6y ago
  It is in the name, marketing, people use Debian Stable, Ubuntu Long Term Support, they don't use Ubuntu Outdated. But that's what it is. The moment it moves to Stable it does not receive versions update. We can't force rename. Maybe we can come up with better names for "testing", "unstable"? * Fresh * Upstream * Rolling I understand people don't want to switch distribution, channels out of fear, inconvenience. Can cross-platform package manager help? The one with dependency resolution — Nix, not the one that bundles it all together like Flatpak or Snap.

rektide 6y ago

this feels like mass cowardice to me. run Debian testing or unstable. run something semi modern. not old lame vendor LTS. those who cower in LTS land, thinking they are saving themselves from troubles have very very very little experience, scant little too contribute to the community that cares & tries to remain mildly up to date. there is such a prevalent fear based mentality about running decent reasonable modern upstream software but it is such FUD, such a cannot do attitude. rarely can these camps justify their afraid behavior. LTS is nonsense. testing, unstable, they work well, & they expose real honest levels of support for systems, versus relying on antiquated but known support that LTS brings the tepid adopters.

sergeykish 6y ago
It is in the name, marketing, people use Debian Stable, Ubuntu Long Term Support, they don't use Ubuntu Outdated. But that's what it is. The moment it moves to Stable it does not receive versions update. We can't force rename. Maybe we can come up with better names for "testing", "unstable"? * Fresh * Upstream * Rolling I understand people don't want to switch distribution, channels out of fear, inconvenience. Can cross-platform package manager help? The one with dependency resolution — Nix, not the one that bundles it all together like Flatpak or Snap.