3 ms·

> You can't take a .deb from Debian 11 and install it on Debian 10. I mean, you can, if you also install its dependencies. And you may end up with a weird fran

• biorach 4y ago
  Yes, but the difficulty and franken-nature of the resulting system means that it's not for the faint of heart.
  • phkahler 4y ago
    So upgrade the whole thing. It's open source so in most cases that's possible.
    • PlutoIsAPlanet 4y ago
      You're shifting more work onto distros and users that shouldn't be work in the first place, and basically preventing non-linux literate people from using their OS. If I install software on MacOS or Windows, I don't have to care if it was packaged for an older version etc, or that my distro may not package a dependency.
      • Nursie 4y ago
        Maybe you should, those dependencies may contain vulnerabilities.
      • diffeomorphism 4y ago
        > shouldn't be work in the first place. It seems very much intentional. You could just keep multiple different, vulnerable versions around and keep everything working. Instead distros say "Nope. We support exactly one version. Update or die." That is also why you have runtimes, grafting, support sunset,... . I agree that a different trade off makes much more sense for desktops. For servers though...
        • charcircuit 4y ago
          Most updates aren't security updates. Not all vulnerabilities in a library affect all consumers of that library. Distros don't have every library packaged. Distros often are not often willing shipping patched versions of dependencies. Distros often offer out of date versions of libraries.
          • diffeomorphism 4y ago
            No. The libraries are not "out of date" but intentionally static. These static foundations are what companies pay lots of extra money for with windows ltsc, red hat, oracle, SuSE etc. > distros don't have every library packaged. Exactly. And for those that are packaged they say "these are the versions we support. If you want to us to do the support work, use these". Again for stuff like windows ltsc that means I install version X now and want this to be supported for the next 5 years. If I instead install a consumer version of windows it means X will be out if support by then and I am expected to have upgraded to X+1, X+2, X+3 during these 5 years. Case in point, Firefox has multiple current versions: 102 ESR and 111. Both get regular updates and neither is "out of date".
• AnIdiotOnTheNet 4y ago
  That's the point though: this sort of thing is not ridiculous on most OSs. I should be able to use old versions of software (or new ones for that matter) without having to worry about causing my system to catch fire and explode.
  • phkahler 4y ago
    That just requires the ability to have multiple versions of a dll, or to install specific versions with an app, or to statically link. Lots of ways to deal with that, don't distributions support any of those options? Oh, not all libraries support that. They need to...
• planede 4y ago
  > I mean, you can, if you also install its dependencies. You will very likely bump into conflicts. Or you you need to upgrade a lot of fundational libraries (like libc), at which point why stay on Debian 10? Backports exist for a reason.
  • Nursie 4y ago
    You might, you might not! Backports do indeed exist for a reason, I just felt like challenging “can’t”
• Ferret7446 4y ago
  If you automate it and work out the kinks, you basically get flatpak.