6 ms·

I am glad to hear this. The more things that are directly derived from Debian the better. It's one of the last respectable Linux distributions without vendor cr

by unxdfa 4y ago

I am glad to hear this. The more things that are directly derived from Debian the better. It's one of the last respectable Linux distributions without vendor crapware and customisations stuffed in it by default.

adql 4y ago
I swear, every time some helpdesk Linux issue filters to us it ends up being "well, that worked fine in Debian, Ubuntu fucked something up"...
- gjvc 4y ago
  If you are just starting out on your Linux journey, save yourself (possibly many) years of varying woe, and go straight to Debian.
  - KronisLV 4y ago
    > If you are just starting out on your Linux journey, save yourself (possibly many) years of varying woe, and go straight to Debian. Debian is a great OS and still runs on some of my servers! However, what about the release/EOL cycle, which might affect some people's reasoning? Along the lines of: "I'll set this up and I want to keep it running reasonably for X years with unattended-upgrades." Debian releases are supported for just a few years: https://endoflife.software/operating-systems/linux/debian https://endoflife.software/operating-systems/linux/debian In contrast, Ubuntu LTS releases are around for about 5 years or longer (HWE): https://endoflife.software/operating-systems/linux/ubuntu https://endoflife.software/operating-systems/linux/ubuntu Technically you do have Debian LTS, but it's never mentioned anywhere as prominently like Ubuntu LTS is, which feels a tad odd (because it works fine): https://www.debian.org/lts/ https://www.debian.org/lts/ Of course, many looked in the direction of something like CentOS for this, or RHEL, or Rocky Linux or Alma Linux etc., which are supported for around 10 years usually. In my experience, DEB distros play more nicely with most of the software that I want to personally run, though.
    - unxdfa 4y ago
      If you stick with Ubuntu LTS you have to put up with the bugs they never fix for longer!
    - gjvc 4y ago
      The main point I should have included above is that Debian's installation and deployment of any given upstream package is generally better than other distributions (my opinion only, YMMV), especially when there are lots of dependencies.
- unxdfa 4y ago
  I had that a while ago. MySQL in Ubuntu 10.04 LTS was a complete fuck up with loads of upstream bugs that weren't patched out. Unfortunately company policy was only Ubuntu with system packages. Eventually I persuaded them to let me use CentOS 6. What they didn't know is they ended up running Debian stable for the next 7 years thanks to a pact with the other sysadmins. Eventually it all went to AWS and Amazon Linux which is basically a uniquely fucked up version of CentOS. Really I'd rather run FreeBSD but no one wants to pay me to do that.
gabereiser 4y ago
Have you used Arch? I agree with you that debian is great but Arch is pure.
- jhoechtl 4y ago
  Sounds like a salesperson. What do you means with pure?
  - capableweb 4y ago
    A typical Arch installation has exactly what you've put into it, no more and no less, as the setup forces you to decide what you want to put into it. It's in no way a beginner distribution, but not every distribution has to cater to the same crowd, which Arch is not afraid of making a choice to who they rather cater to. As a professional, it's really simple (as in "not complex", not as in "easy to start using") and once you've understood your setup, troubleshooting becomes much easier if you have to do it.
  - gabereiser 4y ago
    Arch is free my friend.
- hackeraccount 4y ago
  I'm using Arch on a couple of desktops and it's a rolling release with all the good and bad that comes from that. Based on my limited experience I'd say I like it as much as Debian. Lovely Debian. The one caveat I'd make is - Unless you start dipping heavily into the AUR. My guess - totally uninformed - is that's where most of people's problems with Arch start.
  - c-hendricks 4y ago
    I like Arch and use it everywhere, but avoid anything manual with the AUR (shoutout to chaotic-aur). It gets so much hype but feels like a step down from PPAs in practice.
- unxdfa 4y ago

by unxdfa 4y ago

adql 4y ago

I swear, every time some helpdesk Linux issue filters to us it ends up being "well, that worked fine in Debian, Ubuntu fucked something up"...

gjvc 4y ago
If you are just starting out on your Linux journey, save yourself (possibly many) years of varying woe, and go straight to Debian.
- KronisLV 4y ago
  > If you are just starting out on your Linux journey, save yourself (possibly many) years of varying woe, and go straight to Debian. Debian is a great OS and still runs on some of my servers! However, what about the release/EOL cycle, which might affect some people's reasoning? Along the lines of: "I'll set this up and I want to keep it running reasonably for X years with unattended-upgrades." Debian releases are supported for just a few years: https://endoflife.software/operating-systems/linux/debian https://endoflife.software/operating-systems/linux/debian In contrast, Ubuntu LTS releases are around for about 5 years or longer (HWE): https://endoflife.software/operating-systems/linux/ubuntu https://endoflife.software/operating-systems/linux/ubuntu Technically you do have Debian LTS, but it's never mentioned anywhere as prominently like Ubuntu LTS is, which feels a tad odd (because it works fine): https://www.debian.org/lts/ https://www.debian.org/lts/ Of course, many looked in the direction of something like CentOS for this, or RHEL, or Rocky Linux or Alma Linux etc., which are supported for around 10 years usually. In my experience, DEB distros play more nicely with most of the software that I want to personally run, though.
  - unxdfa 4y ago
    If you stick with Ubuntu LTS you have to put up with the bugs they never fix for longer!
  - gjvc 4y ago
    The main point I should have included above is that Debian's installation and deployment of any given upstream package is generally better than other distributions (my opinion only, YMMV), especially when there are lots of dependencies.
unxdfa 4y ago
I had that a while ago. MySQL in Ubuntu 10.04 LTS was a complete fuck up with loads of upstream bugs that weren't patched out. Unfortunately company policy was only Ubuntu with system packages. Eventually I persuaded them to let me use CentOS 6. What they didn't know is they ended up running Debian stable for the next 7 years thanks to a pact with the other sysadmins. Eventually it all went to AWS and Amazon Linux which is basically a uniquely fucked up version of CentOS. Really I'd rather run FreeBSD but no one wants to pay me to do that.

gabereiser 4y ago

Have you used Arch? I agree with you that debian is great but Arch is pure.

jhoechtl 4y ago
Sounds like a salesperson. What do you means with pure?
- capableweb 4y ago
  A typical Arch installation has exactly what you've put into it, no more and no less, as the setup forces you to decide what you want to put into it. It's in no way a beginner distribution, but not every distribution has to cater to the same crowd, which Arch is not afraid of making a choice to who they rather cater to. As a professional, it's really simple (as in "not complex", not as in "easy to start using") and once you've understood your setup, troubleshooting becomes much easier if you have to do it.
- gabereiser 4y ago
  Arch is free my friend.
hackeraccount 4y ago
I'm using Arch on a couple of desktops and it's a rolling release with all the good and bad that comes from that. Based on my limited experience I'd say I like it as much as Debian. Lovely Debian. The one caveat I'd make is - Unless you start dipping heavily into the AUR. My guess - totally uninformed - is that's where most of people's problems with Arch start.
- c-hendricks 4y ago
  I like Arch and use it everywhere, but avoid anything manual with the AUR (shoutout to chaotic-aur). It gets so much hype but feels like a step down from PPAs in practice.
unxdfa 4y ago