Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Debian 11 “bullseye” freeze started

lists.debian.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 93 posts

Re: Debian 11 “bullseye” freeze started

#81

Post by vdfs »

jbirer wrote: post #51
nerdponx wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe for servers. But it still has plenty of rough edges as a desktop OS. Mint is a much better choice (IMO) for the desktop, that still is somewhat within the Debian ecosystem.

What are your rough edges? I have found Debian Unstable with latest Gnome to be way more stable and productive than I expected.

For me it was outdated browsers, i switched from Ubuntu just for Chromium and was shocked when i saw the version available, not just Chromium but also Firefox, they backport fixes but don't release new version to stable channel. Not really comfortable using Unstable/Testing channels which my have newer version.

It's also hard to download first time you want to install, coming from Ubuntu there is just one x64 .iso and one big "download" button that auto select the right file. In Debian i had to google which file to download from CDs and DVDs version just for x64.

And there is the install UI, it give you a 2006 vibe.

This small things are easy to fix but still there for some reason, probably because they focus on core and more important stuff, but this are great things to have for new users.

Re: Debian 11 “bullseye” freeze started

#82

Post by nerdponx »

jbirer wrote: post #51
nerdponx wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe for servers. But it still has plenty of rough edges as a desktop OS. Mint is a much better choice (IMO) for the desktop, that still is somewhat within the Debian ecosystem.

What are your rough edges? I have found Debian Unstable with latest Gnome to be way more stable and productive than I expected.

Similar to what flukus said, the default configuration is surprisingly minimal in some cases and surprisingly sophisticated/messy in others. And for a desktop user everything is kind of a bare default experience. And that's not to mention the ancient package versions, but if you're a moderately experienced desktop user you might want to consider using Sid/unstable anyway.

Re: Debian 11 “bullseye” freeze started

#83

Post by ncmncm »

jabl wrote: post #72
ncmncm wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could switch it to unsigned 32-bit time_t, and most things would still work right up to 2106. With any luck, civilization will collapse by 2038 and it won't matter anyway. But, struggling back up from collapse on scavenged 32-bit microcontrollers powered by scavenged solar panels, we won't need the extra burden of post-y2038. Switch to unsigned 32-bit time_t for the sake of the (surviving) grandkids.

You keep saying this, but you're too late. The 64-bit signed time_t path was already chosen long ago and is being implemented.

Not on those.

Re: Debian 11 “bullseye” freeze started

#84

Post by mbreese »

brazzy wrote: post #68
jasonjayr wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure; but (IMHO) I think the code names provide an visible and fun reminder that this operating is a operating system for hackers, and this is a tiny bit of personality from that ethos baked into the system. Debian labels itself the 'universal operating system', and makes no aspirations to cater to the lowest common denominator of users.

>Debian labels itself the 'universal operating system', and makes no aspirations to cater to the lowest common denominator of users. That's a bit of a contradiction.

Universal operating system for a wide variety of hardware, but some expertise is assumed for the user.

Kind of a novel choice now that I think about it... most projects aim for more users, which means less assumed knowledge, which necessitates more limits on hardware. Not a bad choice, just different.

Re: Debian 11 “bullseye” freeze started

#85

Post by gautamcgoel »

misev wrote: post #77
gautamcgoel wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which website are you looking at? The release notes I saw said Bullseye would use the 4.19 kernel. I expect them to use a LTS kernel, so I'd be a bit surprised if they choose 5.10.

5.10 is LTS

Woops, my bad!

Re: Debian 11 “bullseye” freeze started

#86

Post by zozbot234 »

vdfs wrote: post #81
jbirer wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are your rough edges? I have found Debian Unstable with latest Gnome to be way more stable and productive than I expected.

For me it was outdated browsers, i switched from Ubuntu just for Chromium and was shocked when i saw the version available, not just Chromium but also Firefox, they backport fixes but don't release new version to stable channel. Not really comfortable using Unstable/Testing channels which my have newer version. It's also hard to download first time you want to install, coming from Ubuntu there is just one x64 .iso an…

> Not really comfortable using Unstable/Testing channels which my have newer version.

Debian now has a backports channel with up-to-date kernels, browsers and more, and those packages will install cleanly on a Debian Stable release. You're not supposed to use Testing/Unstable packages, as installing these on Stable will give you a mixed system that's not necessarily expected to work, and might also break unpredictably upon further upgrades.

Re: Debian 11 “bullseye” freeze started

#87

Post by ce4 »

edoceo wrote: post #15
mbreese wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an outsider, it's not the reliability of the software that is amazing to me. It's the governance and management of the project. The distro has managed to be amazingly consistent and stable for years. But the reason for this is how the project is run. It's hard to do that for so long with minimal drama and they deserve tons for kudos for that effort. Like some others, where CentOS was my go-to distro, I've started…

100%. That management makes it happen. I think we all (who can afford it) should send them a few bucks.

You're right. I just did that.

Re: Debian 11 “bullseye” freeze started

#88

Post by magicalhippo »

dagw wrote: post #79
bayindirh wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since debian both provide version numbers and codenames, I don't think making codename same as the release version makes any sense. When I google Debian 5, I get results to Debian Lenny (which is 5). Also Debian denotes versions in official notices and it's widespread in internet so, codenames are not hindering anything in practice. OTOH, codenames play a bigger role in the ecosystem. It adds motivation, fun and sens…

As someone who doesn't use Debian as my only (or even main) OS, but does manage a few Debian servers, I completely disagree on memorable. I can never remember the order of code names and whenever I read something like "stretch or later" I always have to Google to find out if the servers I have qualify or not. Other than that, I have zero complaints about Debian

> whenever I read something like "stretch or later" I always have to Google to find out if the servers I have qualify or not

This is exactly my problem as well.

Oh well, luxury problem in the grand scheme of things.

Re: Debian 11 “bullseye” freeze started

#90

Post by bayindirh »

dagw wrote: post #79
bayindirh wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since debian both provide version numbers and codenames, I don't think making codename same as the release version makes any sense. When I google Debian 5, I get results to Debian Lenny (which is 5). Also Debian denotes versions in official notices and it's widespread in internet so, codenames are not hindering anything in practice. OTOH, codenames play a bigger role in the ecosystem. It adds motivation, fun and sens…

As someone who doesn't use Debian as my only (or even main) OS, but does manage a few Debian servers, I completely disagree on memorable. I can never remember the order of code names and whenever I read something like "stretch or later" I always have to Google to find out if the servers I have qualify or not. Other than that, I have zero complaints about Debian

> I can never remember the order of code names...

Me neither, don't worry about it :)

> I read something like "stretch or later"...

Well, they're really irresponsible if they're writing like that. All of the places I've seen, downloaded debs either write Debian 9+ or Debian 9+ (Stretch and later) or any similar fashion.

I didn't encounter any Debian $codename only compatibility notes. I also don't write $codename only readme files, etc.

Post reply on HN