I got an old Windows 7 laptop that was going to be thrown out and decided to put Linux on it (see previous thread here). Most people suggested I go with the latest stable version of Debian, so that's what I installed. I've mostly used Windows, but I do have some experience with Ubuntu.
The installation went smoothly, but I've had a few problems getting it set up to my liking:
- I can't figure out how to setup flatpak. Everything seems to be working fine until I enter the last line in the terminal:
flatpak remote-add --if-not-exists flathub https://dl.flathub.org/repo/flathub.flatpakrepo
I hit enter and nothing happens. No error message or anything. I restarted the computer but flatpak doesn't work, either through the software center or the flatpak website. I found a few forum posts with the same problem, but no solutions.
-
I somehow set it up so that my username is not the super user, so I have to type a password in the terminal every time I want to use sudo. Is there a way to fix this without a clean install?
-
I somehow set up the hard drive partitions so that the OS is on an encrypted partition, so I have to put in a password for the BIOS to boot up. Is there a way to fix this without a clean install?
-
I'm used to a desktop interface with a toolbar/start menu that I can pin frequently-used programs to, but with Debian it seems like I need to click "Activities" to do anything. Is there a way to set up the interface so it's more like Windows in that regard?
-
If I need to do a clean install, I'm thinking of switching to Ubuntu, since I'm more familiar with the interface. Is there any reason why I should stick with Debian? I've heard some people trashing Ubuntu but I'm not sure why. Is Debian better for older hardware?
Edit: Thanks for all the knowledgeable replies. I did a fresh install of Debian 12 (64 bit) with KDE and it seems to have resolved all my problems. Although it's a little slow and buggy, I've had to reboot it twice. I'll try a lightweight DE if that continues.
All your points are valid, and I agree with most of them except maybe advising people to use Testing ;)
From a security point of view, Testing is dead last in Debian's vulnerabilities fix order of priorities after SID and Stable, and fixes in general except when the next release is being freezed. I've undergone breaking changes and regressions weekly on Testing, dependency issues that took forever to get fixed, and the year or so I've spent on Testing was miserable. Testing definitely has its purposes, but daily driving it on a laptop should not be one of them.
I understand the issues you've got concerning Flatpaks and how it goes against a distro's philosophy, but I think, from a "normie"'s POV, it's still miles better than the classic "download a random exe from a random website and never bother having to uninstall and reinstall it every week to keep it up-to-date" windows paradigm. Flatpaks are mainly a solution for developers and package maintainers (package once, distribute everywhere), but it benefits the end users. You get to use "the same version as everyone else", always up-to-date whether you're on Debian or on Arch, compiled against a known version of all dependencies so bug reports are more consistent and avoid weird distro-specific behaviors.
Thanks. You're right. I've edited my comment. I shouldn't be advertising testing. And I probably misremember how often I fix a minor hiccup that I forget about 2 days later. And I keep an eye on important programs when they get 'stuck' or I get aware of vulnerabilities and switch to SID or stable with cherry-picked packages. But that requres you to read all the tech news and that's not a safe way to do it regardless.
I agree. Flatpak is lightyears ahead of downloading executables or doing the imfamous 'curl software/install.sh | sudo bash' It is definitely the right tool if your alternative is to download something from a random website or the software isn't packaged in your distro. (And also for proprietary software.)
I think the correct approach is to ask yourself if you really always need the latest releases and newest version of your software. And if it's worth the consequences. Flatpak really makes it so easy and smooth that many people aren't aware it comes with consequences until later. I know everyone always wants everything. Rock stable and tested, bulletproof security and the newest version of everything right away. I do, too. We seem to both like Debian. It's provided me with most things I need for quite some years and it really earned my trust. We all know how the maintenance process works there and how that turns out. Problem is, if I now circumvent what defines Debian, I kinda lose parts of what makes it great. That should be done with some caution. But sometimes it's necessary. Sometimes I want unpackaged software. Sometimes I need the newest features of OBS or Kdenlive. Or FreeCAD did some major restructuring and the Debian version just always crashes once I add a chamfer to my 3D-workpiece and Debian keeps that ancient version in the repository. There's no way around taking matters in your own hand. Also I sometimes keep several versions of browsers around to do some web-development and Flatpak is awesome for things like that.
Maybe I need to provide people with a more nuanced answer the next time someone asks about Flatpak stuff. The main point is probably that you take matters in your own hands at that point and need to be aware of that. It requires you to make case-by-case decisions and have a look at if the specific Flatpak is maintained well. There is no simple answer anymore. With a distro you mainly get what you asked for and you should know if you chose your distro, and with it the way it handles things, for a reason.