477
top 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.world 86 points 8 months ago

Debian users waiting 4 years for an update:

[-] agame@lemm.ee 18 points 8 months ago

Debian: you guys are getting updates?

[-] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.world 14 points 8 months ago

Android-x86: you guys are still getting support?

[-] Resol@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

Symbian: you guys still exist?

[-] Johanno@feddit.de 5 points 8 months ago

Me running debian-testing

๐Ÿ˜Ž

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 4 points 8 months ago

I don't need to wait. Debian works great with unattended upgrades and I don't have to care. Debian will literally run for years without anyone logining for maintenance. It just goes.

[-] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago
[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 4 points 8 months ago

I know but I am just impressed with Debian

[-] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

I've used Debian before, I personally see it as the greatest Linux distro (Arch is just better for my use case)

[-] Gentoo1337@sh.itjust.works 44 points 8 months ago

Gentoo users waiting 12 hours for the update to finish (Firefox is updating)

[-] miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml 8 points 8 months ago

I compiled Firefox from source on my laptop for shits and giggles one time. Poor i3-5005U took a good 24 hours to do it

[-] Engywuck@lemm.ee 33 points 8 months ago

What? 6 fck'n hours? That's so outdated I'd call it LTS!

[-] treadful@lemmy.zip 22 points 8 months ago

I'm flagging that AUR package and you can't stop me.

[-] edinbruh@feddit.it 22 points 8 months ago

Fedora users waiting 6 hours just for the update process

[-] kalkulat@lemmy.world 21 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Ubuntu's updates keep up with Debian's snail-like stable version. In over 10 years using Ubuntu-based distros, I've seen very few app updates ... even between major updates.

Debian's unstable may have more updates, I'd guess. (I might actually try Debian 12 soon.)

And there's always the PPA route. I'm usually busy using current app versions, and so don't often understand that 'bleeding-edge' approach (esp. with all the memory and cores we've got.)

Gotta admit that Arch is what keeps the Arch Wiki a super resource!

[-] Fal@yiffit.net 22 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I run arch and have VERY few problems. I have way more problems on my work ubuntu computer because I'm forced to add PPAs to get even remotely modern things like git versions that support this https://git-scm.com/docs/git-config/#Documentation/git-config.txt-pushdefault

I think it's totally inappropriate to be using a non-rolling release OS as a desktop. You're way more likely to run into issues when you massively update your system every 6 months - 3 years, rather than keeping things up to date constantly. It's not like anyone tests the upgrade process on a desktop. They just do it one day. Whereas it makes sense on a server to be more cautious about updates, where there's presumably staging environments, etc.

[-] kalkulat@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Oh yeah, I don't doubt Arch is solid, just different strokes for different folks. I got a bunch of stable apps I use all day every day to get stuff done, including some coding and keep up. Solid OS for my needs, no racing stripes, does what I need -every- day. I invest my limited OS time in maintenance/backups.

I recently began moving to Mint 21 from 3 NO-TROUBLES years in 19.3. Install from ISO in 20 minutes, copy my apps & configs over, done. Just as with 19.3. No doubt about smooth sailing. Point releases every few months, done in 5 min. Support 4 more years.

[-] Fal@yiffit.net 5 points 8 months ago

I just don't understand what problems you think you're saving yourself from. If the latest version of a package has a bug or just doesn't work for some reason, just install an older one. It takes 2 minutes, and you get to use software from this decade with modern features.

[-] kalkulat@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I didn't mention any problems I don't have. I just don't waste time on updates I don't need. I already have the older one, and it works just fine. (Now and then I hear of a new version that's better, and switch to it.)

Besides, we both know that sometimes updating Linux software does create problems ... which is proven by the existence of Arch Wiki ... and Debian stable ... or force us to relearn some 'improved' features (prime example: KDE's 'Kate' editor.) And don't get me started on Gnome.

Anyway ... so long as you're enjoying yourself with Arch, good for you.

[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 13 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Ubuntu beta testers wait for 6 months. The rest of us wait for 2 years.

Beta testers, thank you for your service!

[-] joyjoy@lemm.ee 7 points 8 months ago

I came home and ran sudo pacman -Syu. My system was already up to date.

[-] ichmagrum@feddit.de 4 points 8 months ago

I haven't even updated to the current LTS yet.

[-] bighatchester@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

Me either everything is working just how I like it and I'll just leave it at that

[-] ichmagrum@feddit.de 3 points 8 months ago

Yep, don't have the headspace right now to deal with any issues that pop up, and TBH Canonical's flavor of corporate-ness kind of takes the excitement out of getting updates, too.

[-] backhdlp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 8 months ago

6 hours? I get disappointed when I don't see another update within 6 minutes

this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2023
477 points (97.6% liked)

linuxmemes

19701 readers
322 users here now

I use Arch btw


Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS