11 ms·

The main problem with Debian is outdated software. For servers the fixed release cycle is great, everything is properly tested and it should be rock solid witho

The main problem with Debian is outdated software. For servers the fixed release cycle is great, everything is properly tested and it should be rock solid without really needing to touch it. But for a regular desktop/workstation system I want more frequent software updates even if it comes at the cost of a little stability. (Of course there's Debian unstable, but I'd rather go with a distro where the rolling release is the main product, and they maybe do a little more testing before making changes)

senknvd 3y ago
I find that Flatpaks[1] work really well for getting the latest version of GUI-only apps. For CLI tools and libraries I haven't found a great solution but I make do with an Arch Linux distrobox[2] container. [1]: https://flathub.org/setup/Debian https://flathub.org/setup/Debian [2]: https://packages.debian.org/bookworm/distrobox https://packages.debian.org/bookworm/distrobox
- andrewaylett 3y ago
  Flatpak is great, and Homebrew works nicely on Linux for other bits and pieces. Linux support made it upstream to https://brew.sh https://brew.sh, so you get all the same things you'd get on a Mac.
jwells89 3y ago
This point is particularly pertinent if Debian isn't the only OS you're using. It can be problematic if the software on your Linux machine is more than slightly behind whatever is on your Win/Mac machines.
HKH2 3y ago
Well there are backports for some packages that require updates due to API changes etc.
Jedd 3y ago
> The main problem with Debian is outdated software. I'm a Debian user. I see this a lot. Often in contrast with Ubuntu. Yet Debian's cycle is roughly on par with Ubuntu's LTS - every ~2 years.[0] Perhaps they mean there are interim releases in Ubuntu? It's hard to say for sure, as the phrase 'outdated software' can mean different things (more than 6 months old, more than 2 years old, in need of a security patch for > 1 week, etc). > But for a regular desktop/workstation system I want more frequent software updates even if it comes at the cost of a little stability. This sounds like you want Debian Testing (currently Trixie). Much more frequent software updates, with an extremely small risk of less 'stability'. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_version_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_version_history
- erremerre 3y ago
  Isn't Debian Testing also more outdated when compared against the main distros ubuntu/fedora/opensuse? It used to be the case in 2010, but that is 13 years ago...
  - Jedd 3y ago
    I use Debian, so I have no idea how main distros of ubuntu/fedora/opensuse work, or what versions of things they offer, and how that might compare to Debian testing. The nice thing is, though, all that information is freely available if you wanted to compare. I can save you a little bit of time by noting that the criteria for a package being promoted from Debian Unstable into Debian Testing has been honed over the years, and is the reason why a lot of people settle on Debian Testing for their day to day machines: The package has been in "unstable" at least for 2-10 days (depending on the urgency of the upload). The package has been built for all the architectures which the present version in testing was built for. Installing the package into testing will not make the distribution more uninstallable. The package does not introduce new release critical bugs. If there's absolutely positively definitely a version of something you want that's in unstable, but not testing, and you are unwilling to wait a week or two before it turns up in Testing - you can usually just download the package and install it with little risk of conflict (presently or subsequently).
- marcosdumay 3y ago
  > This sounds like you want Debian Testing Please, don't recommend Debian Testing to unsuspecting people. The distro is aimed at people that know what they are getting, and has no guarantee it will keep working unless you know really well what you are doing. Even Unstable is supposed to be more beginner friendly.
  - Jedd 3y ago
    > Please, don't recommend Debian Testing to unsuspecting people. Was parent unsuspecting? They said they wanted 'more frequent updates even at the cost of a little stability'. They sound like they're very much in the suspecting camp. The challenge with Debian Testing is some security exposures are longer than for either stable or unstable, hence the recommendation to keep unstable in your sources, ready to go, and maintain some awareness around CVEs / DSAs. > Even Unstable is supposed to be more beginner friendly. I can happily disabuse you of that notion. Definitely, you should not recommend Debian Unstable to unsuspecting people. I have occasionally run unstable on one of my machines over the years, but now pretty much avoid it. When it breaks you either wait for a few days for it to be fixed, or you spend a lot of time trying to understand what's broken - usually with a machine that doesn't get you to a GUI.

senknvd 3y ago

I find that Flatpaks[1] work really well for getting the latest version of GUI-only apps. For CLI tools and libraries I haven't found a great solution but I make do with an Arch Linux distrobox[2] container. [1]: https://flathub.org/setup/Debian https://flathub.org/setup/Debian [2]: https://packages.debian.org/bookworm/distrobox https://packages.debian.org/bookworm/distrobox

andrewaylett 3y ago
Flatpak is great, and Homebrew works nicely on Linux for other bits and pieces. Linux support made it upstream to https://brew.sh https://brew.sh, so you get all the same things you'd get on a Mac.

jwells89 3y ago

This point is particularly pertinent if Debian isn't the only OS you're using. It can be problematic if the software on your Linux machine is more than slightly behind whatever is on your Win/Mac machines.

HKH2 3y ago

Well there are backports for some packages that require updates due to API changes etc.

Jedd 3y ago

> The main problem with Debian is outdated software. I'm a Debian user. I see this a lot. Often in contrast with Ubuntu. Yet Debian's cycle is roughly on par with Ubuntu's LTS - every ~2 years.[0] Perhaps they mean there are interim releases in Ubuntu? It's hard to say for sure, as the phrase 'outdated software' can mean different things (more than 6 months old, more than 2 years old, in need of a security patch for > 1 week, etc). > But for a regular desktop/workstation system I want more frequent software updates even if it comes at the cost of a little stability. This sounds like you want Debian Testing (currently Trixie). Much more frequent software updates, with an extremely small risk of less 'stability'. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_version_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_version_history

erremerre 3y ago
Isn't Debian Testing also more outdated when compared against the main distros ubuntu/fedora/opensuse? It used to be the case in 2010, but that is 13 years ago...
- Jedd 3y ago
  I use Debian, so I have no idea how main distros of ubuntu/fedora/opensuse work, or what versions of things they offer, and how that might compare to Debian testing. The nice thing is, though, all that information is freely available if you wanted to compare. I can save you a little bit of time by noting that the criteria for a package being promoted from Debian Unstable into Debian Testing has been honed over the years, and is the reason why a lot of people settle on Debian Testing for their day to day machines: The package has been in "unstable" at least for 2-10 days (depending on the urgency of the upload). The package has been built for all the architectures which the present version in testing was built for. Installing the package into testing will not make the distribution more uninstallable. The package does not introduce new release critical bugs. If there's absolutely positively definitely a version of something you want that's in unstable, but not testing, and you are unwilling to wait a week or two before it turns up in Testing - you can usually just download the package and install it with little risk of conflict (presently or subsequently).
marcosdumay 3y ago
> This sounds like you want Debian Testing Please, don't recommend Debian Testing to unsuspecting people. The distro is aimed at people that know what they are getting, and has no guarantee it will keep working unless you know really well what you are doing. Even Unstable is supposed to be more beginner friendly.
- Jedd 3y ago
  > Please, don't recommend Debian Testing to unsuspecting people. Was parent unsuspecting? They said they wanted 'more frequent updates even at the cost of a little stability'. They sound like they're very much in the suspecting camp. The challenge with Debian Testing is some security exposures are longer than for either stable or unstable, hence the recommendation to keep unstable in your sources, ready to go, and maintain some awareness around CVEs / DSAs. > Even Unstable is supposed to be more beginner friendly. I can happily disabuse you of that notion. Definitely, you should not recommend Debian Unstable to unsuspecting people. I have occasionally run unstable on one of my machines over the years, but now pretty much avoid it. When it breaks you either wait for a few days for it to be fixed, or you spend a lot of time trying to understand what's broken - usually with a machine that doesn't get you to a GUI.