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

Debian 13 “Trixie”

debian.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 428 posts

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#141

Post by dismalaf »

bayindirh wrote: post #76
Santosh83 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it, snap the package format is not proprietary. Its as open source as say flatpak. What is proprietary is Canonical official snap store, and they patch their version of snap to only use that store. It'd be the same as flatpak being tied to only flathub. Of course that goes against the spirit of FOSS, but there's a bit more nuance there than simply saying "snaps are proprietary".

Did they release the server components for hosting your own snap repositories, yet? I can't seem to find it. Any pointers would be helpful, so at least I can know the latest state of this thing.

No, but it's trivial to implement since Snap is open source so you know exactly what sort of payload it wants.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#142

Post by AnimeLife »

ACS_Solver wrote: post #25

Writing this from my Debian system, it's a great distro that has been excellent to me as a daily driver. I switched to Debian 6 after Ubuntu went way downhill and haven't had cause to regret it. I like Debian's measured pragmatism with ideology, how it's a distro of free software by default but it also makes it easy to install non-free software or firmware blobs. I like Debian's package guidelines, I like dpkg, I lik…

[dead]

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#143

Post by Palomides »

yonatan8070 wrote: post #63

A total of seven architectures are officially supported for "trixie": "trixie" 64-bit PC (amd64), 64-bit ARM (arm64), ARM EABI (armel), ARMv7 (EABI hard-float ABI, armhf), 64-bit little-endian PowerPC (ppc64el), 64-bit little-endian RISC-V (riscv64), IBM System z (s390x) It's good to see RISC-V becoming a first-class citizen, despite the general lack of hardware using it at the moment. I do wonder, where are PowerPC…

IBM puts a lot of work and money into making sure open source stuff runs properly on those two, even if they aren't that popular

them being kept by major distros is therefore not as "natural" as other architectures

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#144

Post by 9cb14c1ec0 »

djfobbz wrote: post #113
ACS_Solver wrote: post #25

Writing this from my Debian system, it's a great distro that has been excellent to me as a daily driver. I switched to Debian 6 after Ubuntu went way downhill and haven't had cause to regret it. I like Debian's measured pragmatism with ideology, how it's a distro of free software by default but it also makes it easy to install non-free software or firmware blobs. I like Debian's package guidelines, I like dpkg, I lik…

Yeah, I ditched Ubuntu Server after too many upgrade headaches. I manage 75+ VPS instances for app hosting, and it's nerve-wracking doing maintenance updates knowing there's a chance one won't boot after. That's easily an extra 1-2 hours per VPS just to get it back. Switched to Debian back in the 8.x days in 2015 and it's been smooth sailing. Never had it break unless I was the one who messed it up.

Me too. All the server software (postgres, caddy, bun, etc) I'm using runs just fine on Debian, and I never have had updates break something on my Debian servers.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#146

Post by lucb1e »

> "trixie" includes numerous updated software packages (over 63% of all packages from the previous release)

Wow, I'm amazed a third of packages haven't seen an update in, ehm checks

> After 2 years, 1 month, and 30 days of development, the Debian project is proud to present its new stable version

I'm a fan of old software myself, in the sense that I find it cool to see F-Droid having a (usually tiny) package that is over 10 years old but it does exactly what I want with no bugs and it works perfectly on Android 10. I wonder if those 30% more commonly fall in the "it's fine as it is" category or in the "no maintainers available" category

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#147

Post by avhon1 »

tremon wrote: post #125
munchlax wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It still exists but without any official iso or installer. If that's all there's to it, you can still use debootstrap, compile a kernel, and point the root parameter to your shiny new install. If the official i386 arch was built with instructions that your hardware doesn't support, tough cookies.

If the official i386 arch was built with instructions that your hardware doesn't support, tough cookies While theoretically possible, that would only happen on processors older than 30 years. Debian's i386 architecture still uses -march=i686 as its baseline compiler target, which is the venerable Pentium Pro: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P6_(microarchitecture)

I have AMD Geode hardware circa 2007 (18 years old) that only has partial support for i686. Requires a true 3/4/586 kernel.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#148

Post by foresto »

ACS_Solver wrote: post #25

Writing this from my Debian system, it's a great distro that has been excellent to me as a daily driver. I switched to Debian 6 after Ubuntu went way downhill and haven't had cause to regret it. I like Debian's measured pragmatism with ideology, how it's a distro of free software by default but it also makes it easy to install non-free software or firmware blobs. I like Debian's package guidelines, I like dpkg, I lik…

> I like dpkg, I like the Debian documentation even if Arch remains the best on that front.

That's curious, because when I was learning to make Debian packages, I found the official documentation to be far better than I had seen from any other distro. The Policy Manual in particular is very detailed, continually improving, and even documents incremental changes from each version to the next. (That last bit makes it easy for package maintainers to keep up with current best practices.)

Does Arch have something better in this department?

Are you perhaps comparing the Arch wiki to Debian's wiki? On that front I would agree with you.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#149

Post by luismedel »

Kudos to the team.

My first contact with Linux was with Debian 2.1. Exactly with this distro CDs https://archive.org/details/linux-actual-06-2/LinuxActual_01...

To be honest, it was a miserable experience to install it on your main computer without anything else available to look for help in case of problems. It was also hard to really try it due to lack of drivers for current (at that moment) ADSL modems.

But here I am a crapload of years later, still loving it :-)

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#150

Post by sofixa »

npteljes wrote: post #65
mmcnl wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really understand why this is such a big problem. You don't have to use snaps.

Defaults matter a lot, and snaps are the default in Ubuntu. The topic is not whether snaps are avoidable or not, but the Ubuntu is going downhill. And snaps are purported to be part of that downhill, which would be Ubuntu's NIH syndrome. As far as I know, Ubuntu's only successful development is Ubuntu itself - the other projects have all failed over the years, and snap, while ongoing, is not winning any popularity co…

> which would be Ubuntu's NIH syndrome

Red Hat do the same. They reinvented the wheel on multiple occasions (systemd and it's whole ecosystem like systemd-resolved and timed and the whole kitchen sink; podman, buildah, dnf, etc etc.)

They just have more success on getting their NIH babies accepted as the standard by everyone else. Canonical just fail at that (often for good reasons, Unity was downright crap for some time) and abandon stuff, which doesn't help their future causes.

Post reply on HN