What is the point of holding software back like Debian does?

All your doing is using a rolling release distro but way behind. It's like if you just copied the 6 month old version of Arch repositories and used that.

Obviously there's nothing wrong with waiting a bit instead of jumping on the bandwagon, and I'm sure "stable" distros also have ways of updating packages in ways that is more stable, like waiting for bugfix updates after a major release.

But wouldn't holding packages back in a method as extreme as Debian degrade the user experience by limiting features and fixes?

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

Yakub: World's Greatest Dad Shirt $21.68

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    go back

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    what are some of the best/most useful/most effect firewalls for Debian? Ones without telemetry, like Portmaster, of course.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      are you saying portmaster has telemetry? what exactly is it recording / collecting?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      are you fricking moronic? have you never used linux? ufw, that's literally all you need, it's foss, there's no telemetry

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      opensnitch for application firewall
      iptables for incoming host firewall

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You'd be surprised at just how much of the world runs on "outdated" software, OP. Not everything needs to be the latest version.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Your right, but for a desktop it isn't the best for the user, maybe on servers or IOT or whatever.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I GOTTA... I'M GONNA... UPDOOOOOOOOT

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This. People are so impatient in 2024 it is unreal. Nobody complained that they had to wait a few years for new OS versions. You also used to install software from a disk and never update it basically.
      If your software is fine now, it will probably be fine for the next 2 years as well (with security patches along the way).

      https://i.imgur.com/eQeYW7V.jpeg

      All your doing is using a rolling release distro but way behind. It's like if you just copied the 6 month old version of Arch repositories and used that.

      Obviously there's nothing wrong with waiting a bit instead of jumping on the bandwagon, and I'm sure "stable" distros also have ways of updating packages in ways that is more stable, like waiting for bugfix updates after a major release.

      But wouldn't holding packages back in a method as extreme as Debian degrade the user experience by limiting features and fixes?

      It is easier to use and maintain (both for users and maintainers) an OS where you have 1 snapshot, that is then patched for security for 2 years, than to have an OS where all parts are moving all the time (like Arch). This is why Arch has issues from time to time, because package X updates, which affects package A, B and C, and suddenly thins go haywire. And it is almost impossible for the maintainers to test all interactions every time a package updates.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Nobody complained that they had to wait a few years for new OS versions
        meant to write:
        >Nobody complained that they had to wait a few years for new Windows versions

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Because it's an OS for servers you moron
    You would understand if you had a job
    The more you need to update, the more unnecessary and tedious work and any update can break stuff, leading to tons of more unnecessary and tedious work

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    its not about not getting the last version of a program. everyone wants that.
    the issue resides in dependency. if gimp needs package x version 1.0 to work, then package x upgrades to 2.0 gimp doesnt work anymore.
    so debian hold everypackage in a version so everything works together

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Imagine having a server in production and documenting every single change made.
    If the server dies and there is a new person responsible, he can easily replicate an exact copy by getting a specific version of Debian and following some steps.
    Imagine doing that on Arch.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      pretty much this. sometimes what you need is a predictable environment that can be easily replicated and things that worked 10 years ago should still work.

      also security. not introducing new features means not introducing new vulnerabilities, and we all know last week's drama by now.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    https://www.debian.org/releases/sid/

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Still have to wait months for updates during a freeze

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >jpg
    moron

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    only a mental midget wouldn't understand the beauty that is Debian. Get out. Never come back.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Debian stable, but based on Arch instead
    Is it a thing?

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I prefer a stable software env, programs that stay the same over shiny new stuff syndrome that breaks and changes all the time.

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I would be ok with Debian if the maintainers did any actual testing at all. All I want is the deluged package to work and its borked - and stuck that way for 2 years.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That only shows that they overextended themselves. They should remove the package.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    what you see as "outdated" or "user experience degrading" software in debian is really just a slightly older version of software that probably works fine (if not flawlessly). you will barely notice any difference between different versions.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    modern webshitter and pajeetware has abandoned stable software releases
    i'm eternally grateful to debian for backporting security fixes and maintaining stable system

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *