4 ms·
Ubuntu uses more up-to-date packages than Debian and has more frequent releases. Canonical provides a whole host of various services, so it depends on what you
by ndsipa_pomu 3y ago
Ubuntu uses more up-to-date packages than Debian and has more frequent releases. Canonical provides a whole host of various services, so it depends on what you want from a Linux distribution. If you value stability over new features, then Debian is a better choice.
- candiddevmike 3y ago> Ubuntu uses more up-to-date packages than Debian More up to date then Debian Stable. You can use backports, sid, or testing and be more up to date than Ubuntu.
- sgarland 3y agoAnd these days, a pure Sid install is honestly pretty damn stable. I still probably wouldn’t run it in prod, but for desktop? Without a question.
- aragilar 3y agoUbuntu LTS has the same frequency as Debian Stable releases (2 years). There are the non-LTS Ubuntu releases, but they are supported for a short period (I think 6-9 months, but I'd need to check, and the files are deleted soon after support ends), which can be a problem if you don't update to the new version fast enough, and get stuck with a system than can neither be updated to a future version (LTS or non-LTS), nor downgraded to a previous LTS, and so you must reinstall everything from scratch (this happened to a colleague of mine, partially their fault for not updating, but Debian's release process doesn't let this happen). My experience is don't run Canonical-developed (as in it originated from Canonical) software, it almost always breaks, get dropped, or they decide to screw around with the licensing. I think early on they tried to copy Fedora (e.g. having the latest by pulling from Debian unstable, 6-month releases), but now they're trying for the enterprise (and trying to copy RHEL), but they lack Red Hat's culture to pull it off.