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

51–60 of 428 posts

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#51

Post by heywire »

binwiederhier wrote: post #30

Thank you to all the Debian volunteers that make Debian and all its derivatives possible. It's remarkable how many people and businesses have been enabled by your work. Thank you! On a personal note, Trixie is very exciting for me because my side project, ntfy [1], was packaged [2] and is now included in Trixie. I only learned about the fact that it was included very late in cycle when the package maintainer asked fo…

Just wanted to say thanks for ntfy! I use it daily to notify me on events from my home Meshtastic node.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#52

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

mmcnl wrote: post #49
happymellon wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Snaps? Proprietary package managers are never great.

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

You really have to work to avoid them; ex. `apt install firefox` will install the snap

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#53

Post by toenail »

potato-peeler wrote: post #19

> The overall disk usage for trixie is 403,854,660 kB (403 GB) What does this mean? If all 69k+ packages are installed, it will take up this much space?

As this also lists lines of code, it sounds more like sources plus packages. Think space that a full mirror (src + generic + arch specific packages) would need.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#54

Post by bayindirh »

mmcnl wrote: post #49
happymellon wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Snaps? Proprietary package managers are never great.

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

You're right. You don't have to use snaps. Ubuntu migrates packages slowly in behalf of you.

Using apt to install some packages installs snap plumbing and downloads the package as a snap automatically. You don't have to install it manually.

There's no malicious intent though, it's made to "impose a positive pressure on the snap team to produce better work and keep their quality high" (paraphrased, but this was the official answer).

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#55

Post by LeoPanthera »

mmcnl wrote: post #49
happymellon wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Snaps? Proprietary package managers are never great.

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

You sort of do. It's really hard to avoid them, because they've modified "apt" to install snaps by default without asking.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#56

Post by 3eb7988a1663 »

zozbot234 wrote: post #22
accrual wrote: post #17

> i386 is no longer supported as a regular architecture: there is no official kernel and no Debian installer for i386 systems. The i386 architecture is now only intended to be used on a 64-bit (amd64) CPU. Users running i386 systems should not upgrade to trixie. Instead, Debian recommends either reinstalling them as amd64, where possible, or retiring the hardware. Impressive that i386 support made it all the way to A…

Hopefully i386 (or perhaps a new i386-like port with added support for 64-bit time values) can move to the unofficial Debian Ports infrastructure for Debian 14 (forky) or Debian 15 (duke). Debian Ports has a m68k port, so supporting one for i386 shouldn't be a huge problem.

To what end? Outside of sheer nostalgia if you are running ancient hardware, you probably have a bespoke application which requires that environment. Either you cannot change for hard technical, compliance, or just fear of the unknown. Firewall it from the internet and continue to run whatever release last worked.

I am not happy about unnecessary ewaste, but an i386 almost certainly has and order of magnitude less horsepower than a raspberry pi or N100.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#57

Post by bayindirh »

Debian's signature feature (upgrade from stable to stable under 15 minutes) shines here too.

My first system migrated in less than 10 minutes, incl. package downloads and reboot. It's not a beast either. N100 mini PC connected to a ~50mbps network.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#58

Post by SilverElfin »

felixgallo wrote: post #31
SilverElfin wrote: post #28

[flagged]

that's not 'content about the increasing politicization of Linux', that's just whiny reverse-victim maga youtuber ragebait. Sail on right past it.

I did find some actual tutorials in the end but … I’ll be honest it seems intimidating. I thought it would be more geared towards the everyday person in 2025.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#59

Post by munchlax »

zozbot234 wrote: post #22
accrual wrote: post #17

> i386 is no longer supported as a regular architecture: there is no official kernel and no Debian installer for i386 systems. The i386 architecture is now only intended to be used on a 64-bit (amd64) CPU. Users running i386 systems should not upgrade to trixie. Instead, Debian recommends either reinstalling them as amd64, where possible, or retiring the hardware. Impressive that i386 support made it all the way to A…

Hopefully i386 (or perhaps a new i386-like port with added support for 64-bit time values) can move to the unofficial Debian Ports infrastructure for Debian 14 (forky) or Debian 15 (duke). Debian Ports has a m68k port, so supporting one for i386 shouldn't be a huge problem.

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.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#60

Post by Eduard »

zvmaz wrote: post #44
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…

> after Ubuntu went way downhill and haven't had cause to regret it. In what way Ubuntu went downhill?

all the weird proprietary Canonical stuff they try to put into vanilla Debian and have it replace common stuff.

snap, lxd (not lxc!), mir, upstart, ufw.

It's neverending, and it's always failing.

Post reply on HN