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

Debian 12 “Bookworm”

debian.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 241 posts

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#71

Post by pja »

aragilar wrote: post #63
troad wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm also considering this, but I'm a little afraid of being stuck in the slow lane when it comes to software updates. I'm aware of Backports, but I'm led to believe it has a somewhat limited selection. Perhaps this is a good opportunity to try a combination of Debian, for general system stability, and Nix, for specific tools where I need newer releases? Has anyone tried this combination before? If so, how did you fin…

Is this a desktop/laptop? You can always run unstable if you think stable is too old (I run unstable on my dev systems, and stable on servers/anything I want to setup and let run). FYI, if you use a Ubuntu LTS release, then unless you always run the latest LTS, the majority of the packages (being in universe) will actually be older than Debian stable (and will always be older then Debian unstable).

I’d suggest testing over unstable as very occasionally broken packages get pushed to unstable. Testing has a week or two delay, which usually catches such problems.

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#72

Post by biorach »

sylware wrote: post #59
yrro wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Finally? Debian has always shipped sysvinit and a bunch of other less-used init systems.

I cannot find install images without systemd and with sysvinit. Do I miss something?

That's because systemd is the default. You can choose sysvinit during installation

https://wiki.debian.org/Init#Changing_the_init_system_-_at_i...

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#73

Post by enriquto »

jacquesm wrote: post #43
bayindirh wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was involved in the discussion, and I'm also torn on that issue, but at least you can disable installation of non-free firmware and install Debian without any non-free software. On the other hand, firmware is a convoluted issue. It was always present, but became increasingly visible over the years. While I'm a strong Free Software supporter, firmware is one of the hardest parts to convert, because of the IP it enta…

That and the simple fact that without it the hardware you've invested in won't work. So this is very much an individual choice, if you don't have such hardware you are fine but shouldn't be voting on whether or not someone who does have hardware that won't work without proprietary blobs has to go out to buy new gear. There are all kinds of considerations that go in to this decision (for instance: environmental impact…

> the simple fact that without it the hardware you've invested in won't work

How is that different from the "if you want to run linux don't buy a winmodem" that we said convincingly twenty years ago ? Would you have approved that linux 2.0 added binary blobs to the kernel in order to correctly work with the hardware that you had invested in (some random winmodem) ?

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#74

Post by bikenaga »

bacchusracine wrote: post #16

Does anyone know if Bookworm includes the Ubuntu-Mate version of the Mate desktop?

I'm on testing, which just released as Debian 12. mate-desktop is 1.26.0, but a few things (like mate-applets) are 1.26.1 and a few (like mate-panel) show up as 1.27.0. I don't use Ubuntu, so I don't know how these compare to whatever Ubuntu uses.

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#76

Post by leesalminen »

cardanome wrote: post #53
troad wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm also considering this, but I'm a little afraid of being stuck in the slow lane when it comes to software updates. I'm aware of Backports, but I'm led to believe it has a somewhat limited selection. Perhaps this is a good opportunity to try a combination of Debian, for general system stability, and Nix, for specific tools where I need newer releases? Has anyone tried this combination before? If so, how did you fin…

Why not use Linux Mint? It is Ubuntu-based but without the bad parts like snap. So you get to keep access to all the Ubuntu packages but also your sanity.

I’ve been maintaining a machine deployed to my mother-in-law’s house for ~4 years with Mint.

She went from needing tech support every time I was at her house to never overnight.

I highly recommend Mint for this scenario.

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#77

Post by arp242 »

bayindirh wrote: post #37
troad wrote: post #5

Congratulations to the Debian team! An important change appears to be the inclusion of non-free firmware by default in the official install image for the first time, as a result of this vote: https://www.debian.org/vote/2022/vote_003 Intriguing. I feel a little torn on this. One the one hand, I appreciate being able to install Debian from an official image onto a bothersome device. On the other, I can't help but feel…

I was involved in the discussion, and I'm also torn on that issue, but at least you can disable installation of non-free firmware and install Debian without any non-free software. On the other hand, firmware is a convoluted issue. It was always present, but became increasingly visible over the years. While I'm a strong Free Software supporter, firmware is one of the hardest parts to convert, because of the IP it enta…

As I understand it "firmware" is essentially just the same as an EEPROM, except that using volatile memory is cheaper and easier to upgrade. No one seems to have great issues with EEPROMs (FSF doesn't anyway), but uploading that same code to the device when it starts is a huge problem? I never understood this, and especially given the huge practical trade-offs the entire thing seems fighting windmills.

The Linux-libre people even removed the warning that the CPU is vulnerable to spectre/meltdown if you don't update the microcode. But ... your CPU already comes with that microcode out of the factory, just a different version of it. How is running an older known to be buggy microcode better?

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#78

Post by vorpalhex »

troad wrote: post #29
fb03 wrote: post #18

Testing this out in a VM. I want to move away from Ubuntu (honestly, from SNAPs)

I'm also considering this, but I'm a little afraid of being stuck in the slow lane when it comes to software updates. I'm aware of Backports, but I'm led to believe it has a somewhat limited selection. Perhaps this is a good opportunity to try a combination of Debian, for general system stability, and Nix, for specific tools where I need newer releases? Has anyone tried this combination before? If so, how did you fin…

I run a mix of Debian and Arch/Manjaro.

Debian is fine right up until you have to build something and find that the dep you need is too old so you have to build that from source, and that dep has a dep that's too old so you have to... basically build hell.

Arch seems to not have these problems but is a hair buggier on occasion.

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#79

Post by noisy_boy »

jlpcsl wrote: post #58

Wow, and it even comes with the very latest KDE Plasma 5.27.5. Quite rare for a stable Debian and makes it more up to date than PopOS. Awesome.

Having used Ubuntu and then Pop!_OS, I have been thinking of going back to the roots and just sticking with Debian. But I also like to get the new stuff (not bleeding edge because I don't want things breaking all the time) and I have heard that stable is, well, old stuff (hence stable). Which makes me wonder how unstable is "unstable" in reality? I have a very strong preference for sticking to .deb packages due to their wide availability so not really looking at cool distros like Arch.

Re: Debian 12 “Bookworm”

#80

Post by zajio1am »

iudqnolq wrote: post #50
zajio1am wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a difference from legal point. If the firmware is hardcoded in device, you do not need to accept any license contract with IP holder. You do not need to copy it, and your right to run it is implied from ownership of the device. If the firmware is independent part bundled with OS, then anyone who wants to run it or even just distribute the OS must accept the license.

Are you guessing what sounds logical to you or do you actually know the answer here? The legal system sometimes has definitions of copying that aren't that straightforward. I've seen in a copyright context judges talk about a computer loading software into RAM being copying. Intel microcode comes with a license: https://bugs.gentoo.org/664134

> Are you guessing what sounds logical to you or do you actually know the answer here?

IANAL, but this is a general concept of exhaustion of IP rights when the IP is sold as a part of physical medium, see (28) and article 4 of EU copyright directive 2001/29.

> The legal system sometimes has definitions of copying that aren't that straightforward. I've seen in a copyright context judges talk about a computer loading software into RAM being copying

This is handled in (33) of the directive:

"The exclusive right of reproduction should be subject to an exception to allow certain acts of temporary reproduction, which are transient or incidental reproductions, forming an integral and essential part of a technological process and carried out for the sole purpose of enabling either efficient transmission in a network between third parties by an intermediary, or a lawful use of a work or other subject-matter to be made."

Post reply on HN