5 ms·
> Debian's claims to adding value in terms of security and stability to those vendor provided packages are IMHO dubious at best. That’s not true. The idea is t
by cbmuser 6y ago
> Debian's claims to adding value in terms of security and stability to those vendor provided packages are IMHO dubious at best.
That’s not true. The idea is that the distribution is tested and stable as a whole and replacing something as OpenJDK can cause a lot breakage in other packages.
There is a reason why enterprise distributions provide support only for the limited set of packages that they ship.
- jillesvangurp 6y agoDepends, if you install a statically linked version from a third party it won't create much headaches. That kind of is the point of vendoring and static linking: not making to much assumptions about what is there and what version it is in. Works great at the cost of a few extra MB, which in most cases is a complete non issue for the user. Debian self-inflicts this breakage by trying to share libraries and dependencies between packages. That both locks you in to obsolete stuff and creates inflexibility. Third parties actively try to not have this problem. Debian is more flaky on this front than it technically needs to be. Kind of the point of the article is that to vendor or not to vendor is a hot topic for Debian exactly because of this.