▲ 271 ▼ Debian 13 burning 10W playing 4K YouTube video on a Framework with max brightness 🫨 (lemmy.ml) submitted 1 year ago by lightrush@lemmy.ca to c/linux@lemmy.ml 63 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 51 points 1 year ago (4 children) Obligatory: "Use Debian instead of Ubuntu. It's basically Ubuntu without Snap." permalink fedilink source hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 25 points 1 year ago* it was always wild to me back in the day when so many container images were based on ubuntu… was like PLEASE debian is functionally identical here at like 1/10th the base container size! permalink fedilink source parent [–] lightrush@lemmy.ca [S] 18 points 1 year ago (1 child) Mostly yes but there are functional differences in convenience. For example the standard upgrade process is completely manual. You have to disable third party repos. You have to change the repos. You have to check if you have space. You have to remove obsolete oackages. And more. On Ubuntu, the software update tool does all that, eliminating a lot of possibility for error. To an exoerienced user, the Debian process is fine. A novice would have plenty of opportunity for frustration and pain. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 5 points 1 year ago (1 child) What? Software Center is GNOME, not Ubuntu. Discover is KDE, not Ubuntu. Debian updates can be done the same way? I don't do any of the things you mention. Using SC or just apt upgrade works just fine. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 child) They're talking about a Debian 12 -> Debian 13 upgrade On Debian, you get release notes on what commands to run. Ubuntu has their own software update utility, separate from Software Center or Discover, that runs the commands for you permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Ahhh OK. I've always gone fresh for a full upgrade. But does apt dist-upgrade not work? That's what the docs say to do. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (1 child) You have to at least modify your sources.list.d manually first. For most people, updating sources.list.d and running full-upgrade will probably work fine... The full instructions are run dist-upgrade remove back ports remove obsolete packages remove non-debian packages clean up old configuration files add non-free-firmware (this is a 12 -> 13 specific) remove proposed updates disable pinning update sources.list.d to point to the next release apt upgrade --without-new-packages apt full-upgrade It takes like an hour? but it's still not "just press okay." Ubuntu's has broken on some upgrades for friends and they had to do the whole Debian process manually, but it does try to automate the removals, disablements, and updating sources Edit: instructions taken from Trixie release. I skipped some that aren't really unique, like make a backup https://www.debian.org/releases/trixie/release-notes/upgrading.en.html permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 1 year ago Ahh yea, thats not too great permalink fedilink source parent [–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago I prefer "ubuntu without the bullshit" permalink fedilink source parent [–] deadcream@sopuli.xyz 8 points 1 year ago (4 children) It has much slower release cycle and ancient kernel. For people with new hardware it's not suitable. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] Eggymatrix@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago Unless you prototype in a cpu fab it does not matter, debian 13 came out last week and its kernel is not that old permalink fedilink source parent [+] rocky1138@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 4 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) This is why Backports exists. You can get any newer packages or kernels you need by enabling it. And Ubuntu LTS doesn't go much farther ahead than base Debian. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] seralth@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) If you need to rely on back ports to have day to day function of HARDWARE. Then your OS is not suitable to your use case. Backport reliance should not be the norm for your avg user. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 1 year ago I disagree, since this is why Backports was made. That being said, everyone is entitled to their opinion. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dropped_packet@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) At that point why not just run a rolling release? Debians whole selling point is stability which backports kinda ruins. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] vandsjov@feddit.dk 3 points 1 year ago I would argue that backporting one package does not ruin everything. If you backport a lot of stuff, then I would agree that it changing distrio to something more up-to-date should be considered because of the increase of potential problems. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 1 point 1 year ago A great way to brick your system and enter the package versionning conflict hell permalink fedilink source parent [+] Magnum@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 8 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 25 points 1 year ago* it was always wild to me back in the day when so many container images were based on ubuntu… was like PLEASE debian is functionally identical here at like 1/10th the base container size! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lightrush@lemmy.ca [S] 18 points 1 year ago (1 child) Mostly yes but there are functional differences in convenience. For example the standard upgrade process is completely manual. You have to disable third party repos. You have to change the repos. You have to check if you have space. You have to remove obsolete oackages. And more. On Ubuntu, the software update tool does all that, eliminating a lot of possibility for error. To an exoerienced user, the Debian process is fine. A novice would have plenty of opportunity for frustration and pain. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 5 points 1 year ago (1 child) What? Software Center is GNOME, not Ubuntu. Discover is KDE, not Ubuntu. Debian updates can be done the same way? I don't do any of the things you mention. Using SC or just apt upgrade works just fine. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 child) They're talking about a Debian 12 -> Debian 13 upgrade On Debian, you get release notes on what commands to run. Ubuntu has their own software update utility, separate from Software Center or Discover, that runs the commands for you permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Ahhh OK. I've always gone fresh for a full upgrade. But does apt dist-upgrade not work? That's what the docs say to do. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (1 child) You have to at least modify your sources.list.d manually first. For most people, updating sources.list.d and running full-upgrade will probably work fine... The full instructions are run dist-upgrade remove back ports remove obsolete packages remove non-debian packages clean up old configuration files add non-free-firmware (this is a 12 -> 13 specific) remove proposed updates disable pinning update sources.list.d to point to the next release apt upgrade --without-new-packages apt full-upgrade It takes like an hour? but it's still not "just press okay." Ubuntu's has broken on some upgrades for friends and they had to do the whole Debian process manually, but it does try to automate the removals, disablements, and updating sources Edit: instructions taken from Trixie release. I skipped some that aren't really unique, like make a backup https://www.debian.org/releases/trixie/release-notes/upgrading.en.html permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 1 year ago Ahh yea, thats not too great permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 5 points 1 year ago (1 child) What? Software Center is GNOME, not Ubuntu. Discover is KDE, not Ubuntu. Debian updates can be done the same way? I don't do any of the things you mention. Using SC or just apt upgrade works just fine. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 child) They're talking about a Debian 12 -> Debian 13 upgrade On Debian, you get release notes on what commands to run. Ubuntu has their own software update utility, separate from Software Center or Discover, that runs the commands for you permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Ahhh OK. I've always gone fresh for a full upgrade. But does apt dist-upgrade not work? That's what the docs say to do. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (1 child) You have to at least modify your sources.list.d manually first. For most people, updating sources.list.d and running full-upgrade will probably work fine... The full instructions are run dist-upgrade remove back ports remove obsolete packages remove non-debian packages clean up old configuration files add non-free-firmware (this is a 12 -> 13 specific) remove proposed updates disable pinning update sources.list.d to point to the next release apt upgrade --without-new-packages apt full-upgrade It takes like an hour? but it's still not "just press okay." Ubuntu's has broken on some upgrades for friends and they had to do the whole Debian process manually, but it does try to automate the removals, disablements, and updating sources Edit: instructions taken from Trixie release. I skipped some that aren't really unique, like make a backup https://www.debian.org/releases/trixie/release-notes/upgrading.en.html permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 1 year ago Ahh yea, thats not too great permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 child) They're talking about a Debian 12 -> Debian 13 upgrade On Debian, you get release notes on what commands to run. Ubuntu has their own software update utility, separate from Software Center or Discover, that runs the commands for you permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Ahhh OK. I've always gone fresh for a full upgrade. But does apt dist-upgrade not work? That's what the docs say to do. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (1 child) You have to at least modify your sources.list.d manually first. For most people, updating sources.list.d and running full-upgrade will probably work fine... The full instructions are run dist-upgrade remove back ports remove obsolete packages remove non-debian packages clean up old configuration files add non-free-firmware (this is a 12 -> 13 specific) remove proposed updates disable pinning update sources.list.d to point to the next release apt upgrade --without-new-packages apt full-upgrade It takes like an hour? but it's still not "just press okay." Ubuntu's has broken on some upgrades for friends and they had to do the whole Debian process manually, but it does try to automate the removals, disablements, and updating sources Edit: instructions taken from Trixie release. I skipped some that aren't really unique, like make a backup https://www.debian.org/releases/trixie/release-notes/upgrading.en.html permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 1 year ago Ahh yea, thats not too great permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Ahhh OK. I've always gone fresh for a full upgrade. But does apt dist-upgrade not work? That's what the docs say to do. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (1 child) You have to at least modify your sources.list.d manually first. For most people, updating sources.list.d and running full-upgrade will probably work fine... The full instructions are run dist-upgrade remove back ports remove obsolete packages remove non-debian packages clean up old configuration files add non-free-firmware (this is a 12 -> 13 specific) remove proposed updates disable pinning update sources.list.d to point to the next release apt upgrade --without-new-packages apt full-upgrade It takes like an hour? but it's still not "just press okay." Ubuntu's has broken on some upgrades for friends and they had to do the whole Debian process manually, but it does try to automate the removals, disablements, and updating sources Edit: instructions taken from Trixie release. I skipped some that aren't really unique, like make a backup https://www.debian.org/releases/trixie/release-notes/upgrading.en.html permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 1 year ago Ahh yea, thats not too great permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (1 child) You have to at least modify your sources.list.d manually first. For most people, updating sources.list.d and running full-upgrade will probably work fine... The full instructions are run dist-upgrade remove back ports remove obsolete packages remove non-debian packages clean up old configuration files add non-free-firmware (this is a 12 -> 13 specific) remove proposed updates disable pinning update sources.list.d to point to the next release apt upgrade --without-new-packages apt full-upgrade It takes like an hour? but it's still not "just press okay." Ubuntu's has broken on some upgrades for friends and they had to do the whole Debian process manually, but it does try to automate the removals, disablements, and updating sources Edit: instructions taken from Trixie release. I skipped some that aren't really unique, like make a backup https://www.debian.org/releases/trixie/release-notes/upgrading.en.html permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 1 year ago Ahh yea, thats not too great permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 1 year ago Ahh yea, thats not too great permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago I prefer "ubuntu without the bullshit" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] deadcream@sopuli.xyz 8 points 1 year ago (4 children) It has much slower release cycle and ancient kernel. For people with new hardware it's not suitable. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] Eggymatrix@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago Unless you prototype in a cpu fab it does not matter, debian 13 came out last week and its kernel is not that old permalink fedilink source parent [+] rocky1138@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 4 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) This is why Backports exists. You can get any newer packages or kernels you need by enabling it. And Ubuntu LTS doesn't go much farther ahead than base Debian. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] seralth@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) If you need to rely on back ports to have day to day function of HARDWARE. Then your OS is not suitable to your use case. Backport reliance should not be the norm for your avg user. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 1 year ago I disagree, since this is why Backports was made. That being said, everyone is entitled to their opinion. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dropped_packet@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) At that point why not just run a rolling release? Debians whole selling point is stability which backports kinda ruins. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] vandsjov@feddit.dk 3 points 1 year ago I would argue that backporting one package does not ruin everything. If you backport a lot of stuff, then I would agree that it changing distrio to something more up-to-date should be considered because of the increase of potential problems. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 1 point 1 year ago A great way to brick your system and enter the package versionning conflict hell permalink fedilink source parent [+] Magnum@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 8 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Eggymatrix@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago Unless you prototype in a cpu fab it does not matter, debian 13 came out last week and its kernel is not that old permalink fedilink source parent
[+] rocky1138@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 4 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) This is why Backports exists. You can get any newer packages or kernels you need by enabling it. And Ubuntu LTS doesn't go much farther ahead than base Debian. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] seralth@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) If you need to rely on back ports to have day to day function of HARDWARE. Then your OS is not suitable to your use case. Backport reliance should not be the norm for your avg user. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 1 year ago I disagree, since this is why Backports was made. That being said, everyone is entitled to their opinion. permalink fedilink source parent [–] dropped_packet@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) At that point why not just run a rolling release? Debians whole selling point is stability which backports kinda ruins. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] vandsjov@feddit.dk 3 points 1 year ago I would argue that backporting one package does not ruin everything. If you backport a lot of stuff, then I would agree that it changing distrio to something more up-to-date should be considered because of the increase of potential problems. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 1 point 1 year ago A great way to brick your system and enter the package versionning conflict hell permalink fedilink source parent
[–] seralth@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) If you need to rely on back ports to have day to day function of HARDWARE. Then your OS is not suitable to your use case. Backport reliance should not be the norm for your avg user. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 1 year ago I disagree, since this is why Backports was made. That being said, everyone is entitled to their opinion. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 points 1 year ago I disagree, since this is why Backports was made. That being said, everyone is entitled to their opinion. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dropped_packet@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago (1 child) At that point why not just run a rolling release? Debians whole selling point is stability which backports kinda ruins. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] vandsjov@feddit.dk 3 points 1 year ago I would argue that backporting one package does not ruin everything. If you backport a lot of stuff, then I would agree that it changing distrio to something more up-to-date should be considered because of the increase of potential problems. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] vandsjov@feddit.dk 3 points 1 year ago I would argue that backporting one package does not ruin everything. If you backport a lot of stuff, then I would agree that it changing distrio to something more up-to-date should be considered because of the increase of potential problems. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 1 point 1 year ago A great way to brick your system and enter the package versionning conflict hell permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Magnum@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 8 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
