this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2023
171 points (98.9% liked)

Linux

48372 readers
1216 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Some mix of wrong and right, the exact proportions of which I'll leave as an exercise to the reader.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] warmaster 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

As an inexperienced user, I can tell you that Debian is way harder to use than most people think. Out of the box, the distro is pretty bare ones. I'm having a blast using an Arch based distro, but on Debian I had to do everything manually. Stable is freaking old, and Unstable has lots of limitations, Docker for example is a true pain.

Ubuntu, Mint, Zorin, POP OS, are way better than Debian for users like me.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago

Stable is freaking old

Red hat users would feel right at home, right?

[–] reddit_sux 7 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Stable is freaking old and unstable.

I ll give you old but not at all unstable, wonder what instability have you found in LTS.

[–] gilbert31 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think he meant: Stable is freaking old. Unstable has a lot of limitations.

[–] warmaster 2 points 1 year ago

Indeed, I edited my comment to better convey my point. Thanks for being so good at reading comprehension.

[–] ghariksforge 1 points 1 year ago

It's more stable to be on the latest versions than to carry around bugs and issues that were solved 5 years ago.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Pretty sure the whole statement is

Stable is freaking old, and unstable has lots of limitations

I don't think they're saying Debian LTS is unstable.

[–] warmaster 2 points 1 year ago

Exactly what my bad wording meant to say. Thank you for your extraordinary reading comprehension.

[–] warmaster 1 points 1 year ago

My bad. I meant the Stable branch is old, which is good for lots of use cases, but not mine. And the Unstable branch which Docker for example, doesn't support. I edited my original comment to better represent what I'm trying to say.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

A lot of people (incorrectly) equate "stable" with "bug-free". So conversely, having bugs would be "unstable".

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Reading this, I wonder if we talk about the same Debian 😆

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"I hate configuring Linux distros which is why I use arch btw"

[–] warmaster 2 points 1 year ago

Arch based, not the same thing. Crystal Linux bundles everything out of the box, so noobs like me don't have to do anything.

[–] warmaster 1 points 1 year ago

Same Debian, different kind of user. I'm sure you know your way around Debian much more than me.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I’m having a blast using an Arch based distro, but on Debian I had to do everything manually

how???

[–] warmaster 1 points 1 year ago

I just flashed a thumbdrive and installed Crystal Linux, everything worked out of the box. Everything I needed was bundled.

[–] liara 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Stable is quite fresh as of 16 days ago. Debian's release cycle isn't exactly 2 years (like Ubuntu), but it's pretty darn close. The only thing Ubuntu really has going for it in terms of additional user-friendliness are PPAs and some additional things like newer versions of GCC as your fingertips. 3rd party software frequently maintain repos for both Debian and Ubuntu though, so compatibility itself is rarely ever a concern.

That said, it's not worth having Canonical injecting their corporate opinion in my server or desktop environments and prefer the more community oriented approach that Arch and Debian take. That said, I don't consider Debian to be an exceptional desktop oriented distro, but if we're talking enterprise-oriented workloads, we're typically discussing server appliances, which is where Debian excels over Ubuntu, imo.

[–] warmaster 1 points 1 year ago

I absolutely agree on Canonical, and how they turned out to be. I don't want anything of what they try to force down my throat. I don't want Snaps, Ads, crazy stuff like Amazon (WTF!?) or crap like that in my distro.

Regarding Stable, before Debian 12, it was very old. I can't adjust to their release cycle. Not on my desktop. Although on a server, It's totally the way to go. I'm planning on installing Proxmox on my homelab, which is based on Debian.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Really? It works for me in my homelab

[–] warmaster 1 points 1 year ago

You must be running Debian stable is old. Which is good for a homelab. Debian unstable isn't supported by Docker.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

RHEL costs $600 a year. Its users can cope with debian easily.