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

71–80 of 428 posts

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#71

Post by jddj »

josteink wrote: post #23
stouset wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I too had no idea what he’s talking about, so I did some digging. So, an open-source contributor who works for Canonical on Ubuntu gave a talk at Debconf. He is a convicted and admitted sexual predator who served time in prison for his crimes. This all is pretty well-documented. But… then what? He did the time for his crimes. He’s on the national sex offender registry. What now? Should he be unemployable? Should his…

> Should his contributions to open-source projects be rejected? As someone whose attitude towards open-source is that it's the code who should do the talking, and not who contributed it (nor the colour of their skin, or their sexual orientation, etc) ... I'd say he should be able to contribute code, as long as the code is good enough. Same rule as every other code-contribution. But the Debian-project has made the dec…

Without derailing this too far further, while we're on reflections it might be interesting to consider what can be read into the virtues or failings of the unbounded punishment camp here.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#72

Post by kev009 »

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…

Both Power and z are many billion dollar businesses each. Banking and other high finance is the stronghold for both. IBM still seems proud of z, Power seems merely tolerated these days which is a shame because it is a nice ISA and the systems are very nice too.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#73

Post by ThatMedicIsASpy »

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've been always a Fedora person, still am. But my PC moved to Proxmox (debian) in 2023. Now a Fedora Atomic sits in a VM running flatpaks and podman containers :D

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#74

Post by Narishma »

> Users running i386 systems should not upgrade to trixie. Instead, Debian recommends either reinstalling them as amd64, where possible, or retiring the hardware.

What I did is switch to NetBSD.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#75

Post by Santosh83 »

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…

Snaps per se are no better or worse than flatpak. Canonical's mistake, IMO, was to make their store the only place snaps can be hosted. That is the "proprietary" bit everyone keeps talking about.

But in practice even for flatpak the only realistic place you can publish your flatpak if you want any traction at all would be flathub, so both formats have only one store right now. But flatpak allows a custom store while for some strange reason Canonical decided not to allow snap that freedom.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#76

Post by bayindirh »

Santosh83 wrote: post #68
happymellon wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Snaps? Proprietary package managers are never great.

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.

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#78

Post by john01dav »

bayindirh wrote: post #64
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Snaps, and ads in the motd

Plus reduced support duration to increase adoption of Ubuntu Pro. Changing some packages ever slightly so they behave a little differently. Switch to sudo-rs, uu-coreutils (rust based stuff), etc., etc. It's not a Debian derivative anymore. It's something else. Was not my cup of tea before, it's even more not my cup of tea now.

Switching to rust-based system software is very different from the clearly profit seeking (or control seeking which is just long term profit seeking) changes like ads and snap (with massive friction to not using snap).

Re: Debian 13 “Trixie”

#79

Post by krylon »

As an owner of two i386 systems (both netbooks built around Intel's Atom N270), that run Debian, I am a little sad. I understand the reasoning, and I won't deny it is a very niche platform by now. But I had hoped Debian, with a history of supporting a wide range of platforms, would keep i386 going for a while longer.

Fortunately, bookworm will continue to receive updates for almost 3 years, so I am not in a hurry to look for a new OS for these relics. OpenBSD looks like the natural successor, but I am not sure if the wifi chips are supported. (And who knows how long these netbooks will continue to work, they were built in 2008 and 2009, so they've had a long life already.)

EDIT: Hooray, thanks to everyone who made this possible, is what I meant to say.

Post reply on HN