5 ms·

You deal with it by being happy that it doesn't constantly change UI/Interface/Features and break your workflow unexpectedly sometimes. Yes, you don't always h

You deal with it by being happy that it doesn't constantly change UI/Interface/Features and break your workflow unexpectedly sometimes. Yes, you don't always have the latest and greatest and if that's a solid requirement, Debian isn't a good choice. But for a stable, not-going-to-change-out-from-under-you point of view, Debian is fantastic. Software you can rely on that's still patched for security issues.

caycep 3y ago
isn't there a testing/"unstable" version that has the latest/greatest? I had heard it was roughly as stable as ubuntu...
- pavon 3y ago
  unstable is a bit of an odd fit for most purposes. For 6 months leading up to a stable release it is frozen, so few packages are being updated, then for 6 months after a stable release there is a bunch of churn and things can get a bit unstable, and then for about a year it is like running a rolling release, albeit one that isn't as up-to-date as Arch. I feel most people who want up-to-date packages would be better off running Arch or Fedora.
- pessimizer 3y ago
  It's "testing", not unstable. "Unstable" is actually unstable, and seems to be where people are actually testing things. I find the names needlessly misleading, although accurate, because "testing" is being tested to be the next "stable." "Unstable" is where people are figuring out things; they go into "testing" when they're pretty much figured out. I've had an order of magnitude more breakage on regular Ubuntu updates than on Debian testing. That being said, I ditched Ubuntu probably a decade ago and it might go out better now.
  - OfSanguineFire 3y ago
    Debian Testing doesn’t get security updates quickly, unlike Stable and Unstable. Hence why the Debian wiki does not recommend Testing for ordinary users.
packetlost 3y ago
Debian is really solid as a server OS. I wouldn't use it for desktop unless you're using ancient hardware. My days of using CentOS as a development workstation are thankfully behind me. I will never use a long-release cycle distro for primary development, the headaches that come with it are not worth it.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  I use it as a desktop OS on all of my nonserver machines, and it's been great. Obviously, tastes vary, of course.
- realitythreek 3y ago
  Depends on the apps. For most it's completely irrelevant whether it’s the latest release. For others, there’s flatpaks or containers (docker/podman). Personally I think people get too attached to bleeding edge.
- ptero 3y ago
  I use Debian on the desktop with various hardware, both inside the case and outside it (various SDRs and data capture toys) and it works great for me. Just a data point, YMMV.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- pessimizer 3y ago
  If you aren't worried about your system being unstable, just use testing. Or just do what everyone else does, and use testing on your laptop/workstation and stable on everything else.
- TacticalCoder 3y ago
  > Debian is really solid as a server OS. I wouldn't use it for desktop unless you're using ancient hardware I'm running Debian 12 (since the soft freeze I think) on my newly built AMD 7700X. I wouldn't exactly call that "ancient hardware". Zero issue. No headaches for me. FWIW I'm running Debian since Debian 1.1 (1.1, not 11).
KronisLV 3y ago
I mean, if you really need newer software, then you can probably find a DPA (like Ubuntu's PPA). The PHP packages provided by Ondřej Surý come to mind as an example, which have recent versions that would otherwise be unavailable: https://deb.sury.org/ https://deb.sury.org/ Alternatively, one can use OCI containers (e.g. Docker) for something even more recent, or software unavailable on Debian altogether. That way, you can have a very stable base server OS, with isolated bits of something more recent, feature packed, albeit sometimes a bit more unstable. Those aren't the only options, of course, but they are pretty viable, depending on your use case. Personally, I also didn't see any issues with the ~10 year EOL of some of the RPM distros, as long as you care mostly about security updates/stability and not recent features.

caycep 3y ago

isn't there a testing/"unstable" version that has the latest/greatest? I had heard it was roughly as stable as ubuntu...

pavon 3y ago
unstable is a bit of an odd fit for most purposes. For 6 months leading up to a stable release it is frozen, so few packages are being updated, then for 6 months after a stable release there is a bunch of churn and things can get a bit unstable, and then for about a year it is like running a rolling release, albeit one that isn't as up-to-date as Arch. I feel most people who want up-to-date packages would be better off running Arch or Fedora.
pessimizer 3y ago
It's "testing", not unstable. "Unstable" is actually unstable, and seems to be where people are actually testing things. I find the names needlessly misleading, although accurate, because "testing" is being tested to be the next "stable." "Unstable" is where people are figuring out things; they go into "testing" when they're pretty much figured out. I've had an order of magnitude more breakage on regular Ubuntu updates than on Debian testing. That being said, I ditched Ubuntu probably a decade ago and it might go out better now.
- OfSanguineFire 3y ago
  Debian Testing doesn’t get security updates quickly, unlike Stable and Unstable. Hence why the Debian wiki does not recommend Testing for ordinary users.

packetlost 3y ago

Debian is really solid as a server OS. I wouldn't use it for desktop unless you're using ancient hardware. My days of using CentOS as a development workstation are thankfully behind me. I will never use a long-release cycle distro for primary development, the headaches that come with it are not worth it.

JohnFen 3y ago
I use it as a desktop OS on all of my nonserver machines, and it's been great. Obviously, tastes vary, of course.
realitythreek 3y ago
Depends on the apps. For most it's completely irrelevant whether it’s the latest release. For others, there’s flatpaks or containers (docker/podman). Personally I think people get too attached to bleeding edge.
ptero 3y ago
I use Debian on the desktop with various hardware, both inside the case and outside it (various SDRs and data capture toys) and it works great for me. Just a data point, YMMV.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
pessimizer 3y ago
If you aren't worried about your system being unstable, just use testing. Or just do what everyone else does, and use testing on your laptop/workstation and stable on everything else.
TacticalCoder 3y ago
> Debian is really solid as a server OS. I wouldn't use it for desktop unless you're using ancient hardware I'm running Debian 12 (since the soft freeze I think) on my newly built AMD 7700X. I wouldn't exactly call that "ancient hardware". Zero issue. No headaches for me. FWIW I'm running Debian since Debian 1.1 (1.1, not 11).

KronisLV 3y ago

I mean, if you really need newer software, then you can probably find a DPA (like Ubuntu's PPA). The PHP packages provided by Ondřej Surý come to mind as an example, which have recent versions that would otherwise be unavailable: https://deb.sury.org/ https://deb.sury.org/ Alternatively, one can use OCI containers (e.g. Docker) for something even more recent, or software unavailable on Debian altogether. That way, you can have a very stable base server OS, with isolated bits of something more recent, feature packed, albeit sometimes a bit more unstable. Those aren't the only options, of course, but they are pretty viable, depending on your use case. Personally, I also didn't see any issues with the ~10 year EOL of some of the RPM distros, as long as you care mostly about security updates/stability and not recent features.