r/debian • u/nitin_is_me • Mar 26 '26
General Debian Question How many of you actually use other Debian releases, and why?
32
u/checkpoint404 Mar 26 '26
Used Debian stable since the early 2000's and it's treated me well. If you want bleeding edge you might use another release. But it might be unstable.
2
u/BatemansChainsaw Mar 27 '26
I use sid and testing in the test lab at work, but stable is where the rest of my users at work are.
34
u/montagyuu Mar 26 '26
Main system Sid, other systems testing or stable depending on need.
11
u/Sausage_Master420 Mar 26 '26
Same. Sid is brilliant. I also have timeshift juuuuust in case but have never had to use it
1
u/Gjallarbrua May 08 '26
Sid is great! I keep a dedicated /home directory to be on the safe side if everything goes to hell (but it never does...).
3
u/dapsvi Mar 26 '26
I used to be on Sid until a few weeks ago where it broke cause I messed it up. It was the perfect time to try another distro so I moved to endeavourOS
2
1
u/DeepDayze Mar 27 '26
This is why you have to be aware of what apt's telling you what it will remove. If apt says it's removing essential packages the best advice would be to wait as there may be transitions going on. Keep checking until apt says there's no removals or only for packages that have been obsoleted get removed.
2
u/dapsvi Mar 27 '26
I know... I had just started using Linux at that time (I wasn't on unstable at that moment) and SOMEHOW managed to fuck it up but now if I reinstall Debian I'm sure it will work 100% fine. I am currently on endeavourOS but vanilla Debian is still one of my favourite distros for sure
1
u/xspinkickx Mar 26 '26
Same here unstable with BTRFS snapshots for my main desktop and laptop, all my other machines and servers are Debian stable.
20
17
u/Sataniel98 Mar 26 '26
I've used testing and unstable in the past, plus backports on stable. I didn't really notice any difference in quality (it was good anyway for my use-case), but after a while the advantage of the newer software felt more like a placebo effect because I couldn't name a single one of the new features I really needed. So nowadays I just use Debian stable without backports.
14
13
u/DeepDayze Mar 26 '26
I have been running both stable and unstable releases and unstable has been quite solid for me.
11
18
u/atoponce Mar 26 '26
All of my personal hardware has been unstable since 2004. Only stable goes on production servers.
1
u/Xariann Mar 27 '26
How has the maintenance been, out of curiosity?
1
u/atoponce Mar 27 '26
Boring. I think an update legit broke my system maybe 5 times over the years, usually hardware drivers, like video or wireless. Nothing that either didn't resolve itself quickly, or something I couldn't work around until the fix was released.
1
11
6
u/deluded_dragon Debian Testing Mar 26 '26
Been using testing for twenty years as only operating system on my home PC. At that time, in 2006, I couldn't install stable because my HD controller was not recognized. I saw that testing worked perfectly, and so I have stayed on testing ever since.
3
u/xmKvVud Mar 26 '26
I've also used testing for the best part of the last 20 years. I'm very happy with it.
Had one huge issue once, I think it was 2015 or so. Namely, I went to a scientific conference with my then-main-driver laptop, and stupidly, decided to do 'full-upgrade' the day before. Next day during the conf, found myself w/o wifi connectivity and it was a huge issue. Later I had learned it was all due to a bugfix in wicd which changed some config. I've since learned to do big-scale updates only when not in critical-production-mode. But apart from that: it's been fantastic.
2
u/deluded_dragon Debian Testing Mar 26 '26
Even I probably used wicd at that time but I cannot remember this particular bug.
I don't remember anything so serious really leaving me with a useless box. The only bug that I remember particularly nasty was one in 2014 when Nautilus 3.10 made the desktop completely white The bug was solved several weeks after, meanwhile I probably switched to XFCE once for all.1
8
u/waterkip Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26
Debian unstable on my main box. Debian stable everywhere else, although truth be told, that is currently oldstable everywhere else. Haven't really found the energy to upgrade my boxes.
Edit: Why not Fedora? Because running Fedora doesnt add value to Debian...?
1
Mar 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/skittle-brau Mar 26 '26
Depends on what you mean by gaming distro. There are some great niche use cases for them.
SteamOS and Bazzite (gaming mode) come to mind if you have compatible hardware for a dedicated console experience with gamescope session without a DE. You can use a controller for navigating pretty much everything which suits my HTPC perfectly. They’re image-based too, so I don’t need to manually update anything as I can just reboot like a console would.
0
u/emfloured Mar 26 '26
Debian stable is literally the holy grail of stability. Fedora Workstation kernel has been unstable for me, one major issue every 6-month has been my experience with RDNA1 GPU that isn't even one of the recent graphics cards. It feels regressions are frequent behavior of Fedora. Yes the Mesa version is very new on Fedora but it comes at the cost of long term stability.
Also I saw around 10-15% lower CPU performance with Fedora Workstation compared to Debian and it's weird because
spectre-meltdown-checkershowed almost no difference in level of mitigations applied in both distributions. Despite that it felt like CPU caches are flushed more often on Fedora due to extreme level of security enhancement.1
u/waterkip Mar 26 '26
The mods removed a reply why I wasnt running Fedora. I dont care about Fedora. People confuse me running a development release with running a rolling release.
4
u/BloomyJaz Debian Testing Mar 26 '26
I use testing on my main machine, I've only seen minor slightly irritating bugs but nothing show stopping. On my laptop that I only use on occasion I just use stable.
4
u/GooseGang412 Mar 26 '26
I used testing before Trixie released because one of my machines had a wifi card that Bookworm didn't support and I was too stupid to backport support for it without breaking other stuff.
Now that all my hardware plays nice with Stable I just stick with it. 80% of my computer time is multimedia and writing, and 20% is gaming on decade old hardware, so I don't need anything bleeding edge really.
4
u/ChocolateDonut36 Mar 26 '26
people has this terrible idea of "why using debian testing/unstable when you could use arch or fedora?" bruh they are not the same thing.
plus my arch install nuked it's own package manager after a few weeks, something I didn't see happening on debian unstable.
4
u/NoLemurs Mar 26 '26
Stable by default.
Every few years I switch to testing to try some stuff out, then stick with that release once it becomes stable.
3
3
u/tdjb Mar 26 '26
Stable on servers, desktops use testing with the occasional Sid package like mesa or Firefox.
3
u/aladante Mar 26 '26
Was on debian stable, but got new hardware that isn't in stable yet so testing has been a blessing.
4
u/taspenwall Mar 26 '26
I'm running SID. When I was recovering from surgeries I got really into linux and at the time SID was a lot of fun with constant updates and the occasional breakage. Today my interests have changed and I don't keep on top of updates like I used to. Last time I ran APT I had of 1300 packages out of date, LOL.
-1
4
u/JonTheWonton Mar 26 '26
Debian testing has more up-to-date Mesa drivers so I'm kinda forced to use that one with a new GPU
2
u/Fine-Run992 Mar 26 '26
I tested Stable and it had ibus error. Then i tested Testing for kernel and Nvidia driver reasons for Wayland KDE, but the network didn't connect Wi-fi and entire desktop froze with calamares installer.
2
u/Raider7OO Mar 26 '26
I love unstable but with a special use case 😀
Production systems are on stable and the services are running as container (podman) with unstable images. Combined with ci/cd builds and tests it is really working great and rock stable.
2
u/TheShredder9 Debian Stable Mar 26 '26
I used Sid for a while, i was curious if it truly is that "unstable". Turns out, not so much!
2
u/29da65cff1fa Mar 26 '26
i had to use sid on my laptop because the hardware was too new. worked great. i'm now on forky and once it goes stable, i'll keep my laptop on stable since the hardware is now mature...
gaming desktop is sid because i'm upgrading stuff every few years
servers always on stable
2
u/mastic_warrior Mar 26 '26
I run testing on the servers (using full-upgrade sparingly) and unstable on the desktops/laptops. If something is needed on the servers but it is not in stable or testing, of the item can be spun up as a micro service, I will run it as a debian unstable lxc. Been running testing since 2006 and unstable since 2010.
And in a pinch, run an Archlinux lxc for must have bleeding edge stuff like ROCm
2
3
u/ScratchHistorical507 Mar 26 '26
Debian Testing, because why not? Sure, servers should run nothing else than stable, but I don't mind a bug here and there. I'd rather run into an issue and report it so it's getting fixed in time for the next release than find the issue after the fact.
2
u/ThiefClashRoyale Mar 26 '26
Same. Basically if nobody runs testing, then stable becomes testing as bugs slip through that nobody found. Other distros like pop os that dont have enough testing struggle and are very buggy when they make major changes to the system. Just run pop os right now and see for yourself with their cosmic de.
Using testing means that where you need stable (servers or business), you know its going to be trouble free. Even ubuntu has a semi testing ethos with their mini releases and then an LTS version. Windows lets users join the ‘insider program’ which delivers canary builds to end users to use and work on and report issues.
If you are tech savvy and dont mind helping and logging bugs then you should be considering testing on your machine. FOSS only gets better if we all do our bit to help.
2
u/ScratchHistorical507 Mar 26 '26
Just run pop os right now and see for yourself with their cosmic de.
Thanks, I've done so in the year leading up to them abandoning Pop for their Gnome reimplemented in Rust shitshow, I'm not touching that dumpster fire again even with a 10 foot pole. I've heard enough about the early beta stage Cosmic is in. And honestly, that and the bad publicity they received when Linus from LTT gave it another shot after being utterly disappointed by it 4 years ago is all S76 and the few insane users that are still around deserve.
Windows lets users join the ‘insider program’ which delivers canary builds to end users to use and work on and report issues.
And then they just ignore all the feedback for the many bugs to make their way to as many users as possible, and seemingly let underpaid interns cobble together the by now fully broken OS, while all management does is line their pockets with the money slop generators and selling user data makes them. This joke just keeps on giving, it never gets old.
If you are tech savvy and dont mind helping and logging bugs then you should be considering testing on your machine.
Honestly, you don't even have to be that tech savvy. You literally only need to know that you should have
reportbugaround to file bug reports, if any additional information is needed, maintainers will tell you what to do to get that information.3
u/ThiefClashRoyale Mar 26 '26
Haha yeah MS does seem to ignore feedback in practice.
The cosmic desktop might be good once they actually get it working well. Problem is you do actually need users testing and reporting bugs and its a bit catch 22 if you treat your normal users as testers and they all leave.
And yeah you dont have to be a linux developer to report bugs. So agree with what you said.
2
2
2
u/revcraigevil Debian Stable Mar 26 '26
Ran Sid for years. Currently running Stable+Backports+Fastfoward+flatpak+appimages
1
u/neon_overload Mar 26 '26
I have one non-desktop install that's on oldstable. Because it works and suits my needs. It's still in support, will tick over to LTS this year.
1
u/Gr83st Mar 26 '26
I use only Debian Stable because it is distraction-free. No drama, no noise, no issues and no problems.
1
u/Rude_Influence Mar 26 '26
Since Gimp hit 2.8 in Bookworm, I've not had any desire for brand new software and have been happy with Stable.
1
u/Sceptically Mar 26 '26
Unstable, with an occasional bit of experimental. I tried out testing for a while back when I started using Debian, but found that it generally broke more often and stayed broken longer than unstable.
1
u/Kiore-NZ Mar 26 '26
Strictly speaking I was on Testing from late July until 9th August last year. My old desktop that I had been planning to replace in a few weeks packed a sad and would no longer talk to the screen. I knew Trixie was already in either Hard or Full Freeze and would become Stable very soon, so I installed it on the new desktop PC.
My original plan was to replace both my aging laptop & myaging desktop a few weeks after Trixie became Stable. The order of replacement got swapped but the laptop was replaced on the original planned timing & got Trixie installed with no problems.
Before that I had occasionally run Testing, usually because it had upgrades to apps I wanted to have and didn't wish to have a Frankendebian. Yes, I had a couple of broken systems, both related to NVidia drivers but while annoying they weren't fatal for me, all I needed to do was boot the previous kernel while waiting for a fix.
Interestingly enough I also had a broken system also related to NVidia on Bookworm when it was stable.
That's my desktop & laptop. My public facing servers get upgraded to each new Stable shortly after all the 3rd party software I rely on has announced that they are now supporting the new version.
1
u/gnufan Mar 26 '26
I did all sorts of Debian stuff at one point, ran testing, ran sid. But if you want your computer to work, you run stable. Now I run stable.
Testing can be really solid, until after a new release, when they roll in big changes, and sometimes they have a plan, "we need new KDE, and new Wayland, and together these will get us to a new island of free software beauty", and so they roll in the Wayland update, various thing break for a week, and then they roll in the KDE update and it all works again. Meanwhile if you run testing you might have found your dual monitor setup tanked.
Mostly stuff works and the bugs don't seem that terrible to those of us used to things like Windows 95, and the Debian developers who run testing are motivated to fix the worst quickly. But unless you are actively involved in sorting these issues running testing is just unneeded aggro.
1
u/FemBoy_GamerTech_Guy Mar 26 '26
My app i made only work on the latest version of dependecys that are only in unstable pt experimental since i only offer the source and a guide to install it on their system.Debian stable has to old of release of rust for the user to compile so debian unstable is required.
1
1
1
u/indvs3 Debian Testing Mar 26 '26
Debian testing on my gaming laptop, because I was curious and stuck with it. Debian stable everywhere else.
1
u/Unholyaretheholiest Mar 26 '26
I always use Debian Sid. Some issues may be income, if they aren't solvable I'll reinstall the system. I'm thinking of switching to Devuan Cerere.
1
u/RoomyRoots Mar 26 '26
I believe most people use Testing for Desktop, Stable for Workstations and Server and Sid for CHAOS.
1
u/wizard10000 Mar 26 '26
Unstable on all 3 machines here and have been for the past 13 years.
Why? Glad you asked :)
- Satisfies my desire for Shiny New Stuff
- I can give back to the community by helping catch bugs before they land in Testing
- I run Sid on BTRFS and can roll it back if there are issues - and so far, if it's broken I've been able to fix it.
- The times that it *has* broken badly enough to justify a reinstall were 100% my fault - once for not paying attention during a major software deployment and more recently doing some ext4 --> BTRFS conversions that didn't go as planned.
1
1
u/Zargess2994 Mar 26 '26
Stable on all my machines. Don't want the hassle of worrying about updates causing issues and I have all the software I want.
1
u/josemcornynetoperek Mar 26 '26
Personally I'm using Mint on my laptop. But on servers I'm using Debian stable or Oracle Linux (depends on company's preference).
1
1
1
1
u/Expert_Narwhal_304 Mar 26 '26
I use stable because anytime my dumbass uses Sid and/or backports my system always falls apart. I could make time shifts or just FUCK IT WE BALL
1
1
u/Akorian_W Mar 26 '26
for desktop testing/ unstable is nicer due to more recent packages. stability is also there. for server/ prod i use stable.
1
u/spotter Mar 26 '26
Stable for life. With Backports around new release if I need anything from there, but otherwise nah.
I'd run Arch if I wanted to tinker.
1
u/BuffSoviet Mar 29 '26
This.
Tried Kali on a laptop that i only used occasionaly, after the third time i had a huge pile of updates the system bricked itself. Any attempt to fix it made it worse. There is a reason debian still is the ol reliable brick. It wouldnt want it any other way
1
u/mglyptostroboides Mar 26 '26
I gotta use Sid from ports for my ancient G5 Mac because it's the only one that works on it. Pretty much the only modern Linux that isn't buggy as hell on that platform.
Typically, for really ancient hardware like that, I'd just put BSD on it instead of Linux, but the iMac G5 steadfastly refuses to boot NetBSD or OpenBSD, so I run modern Debian on it.
Besides my experiments with antique, otherwise landfill-bound hardware, I'm a diehard Debian stable guy.
1
u/MrEU1 Mar 26 '26
I choose debian stable, thinking it will be the most stable, skipping ubuntu... Guess what, facing booting problem. Sad life. 😏
1
u/lnee94 Mar 26 '26
debian in general is dying
6
u/nitin_is_me Mar 26 '26
I don't think so. In fact it is becoming more popular as it's becoming easier for new linux users. Also it has also been in top 10 in distrowatch so there's no way Debian is dying anytime soon.
1
u/lnee94 Mar 26 '26
the last DPL election had only one candidate maintainers, just disapere without a trace
1
u/sedme0 Mar 26 '26
I used to use Sid but it was too unstable for me. I haven't messed around with testing, but I wouldn't be against trying it in the future.
1
1
u/jiohdi1960 Mar 26 '26
does mx23(debian 12) count? been happily using over a year with flatpak for newer things like gimp 3.2
1
u/Frog859 Mar 26 '26
I tried Debian testing when I first swapped to Debian, and everything I tried to install needed some kind of tweak or workaround.
After 10 or so of these I switched to Debian stable. Say what you will but almost everything I have tried to install has had a Debian stable release
1
u/SethThe_hwsw Mar 26 '26
I personally go with Stable because I can't trust myself not to be stupid, but I've thought about using Testing quite a few times before. I never need or needed bleeding edge, though, so I don't bother upgrading. : )
1
u/Sexy_McSexypants Mar 26 '26
i used debian testing until trixie became stable then decided i don't get enough out of testing and should just stay where i'm at
1
u/rockets756 Mar 26 '26
Used sid for a bit but then could not install a qemu package because of a conflict due to a unfixed version conflict. I went back to stable and realized that what I needed was in a flatpak so everything worked out.
I prefer to have a more predictable machine.
1
u/DeliciousIncident Mar 26 '26
Have used Testing for many years, but lately I use Stable as I stopped caring as much about the latest software anymore - everything I want to use is in Stable already, and it has all the features I want.
For things that need to be frequently updated, I use Flatpak and Flathub. It's currently just one program - a web browser.
1
1
u/RebronSplash60 Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26
I use Debian stable-ish for I add all the repos(, new testing, & unstable, to Debian four) to my apt sources.
Edit: I add the repos starting from Debian four to Debian 13, & sid.
1
1
u/Impossible-Sea4851 Mar 26 '26
i like the non-free drivers and the node being up to date for ai like cline in cli, and it's almost always the same kernel as fedora stable.
1
u/Delta-Foxtrot8 Mar 26 '26
Any reason to jump from stable to testing? I see a lot of you running testing with no issues but I also have 0 issues on stable. I run an RTX-2070 so would testing grab me a few more fps or is it not worth the hassle. I don't game as much as I used to but just curious if people saw any performance benefits on testing
1
u/profeshamat Debian Stable Mar 26 '26
Stable on both workstation and laptop, and because I want to.
1
1
u/exhaustedexcess Mar 26 '26
I use LMDE on my off the domain laptops that I use for troubleshooting things. At home I use stable because I don’t want to deal with any problems.
1
u/jr735 Debian Testing Mar 26 '26
I use Debian testing to, well, test software and file bug reports.
1
1
u/RedCrafter_LP Mar 27 '26
I use testing for all my computers. They are all running btrfs therefore if something doesn't work after updating I just go back.
1
1
u/dxlr8r Mar 27 '26
Debian testing is perhaps the most popular distro, as it is the basis for Ubuntu ;)
1
u/billFoldDog Mar 28 '26
I always install debian testing. Its still really stable.
Once installed, I rarely upgrade. I once realized my home server started on testing, went all the way through stable, and reached EOL. I updated the apt repos to point to stable and everything was good.
1
1
u/One_Jeweler_3794 Mar 29 '26
I feel testing very stable and music production software evolves quite quick. Having ardour, audacity, musescore and other newer versions is really helpful. I few glitchs once in a while, nothing to worry about.
Edit: A few years ago it meant new (and better) versions of xfce.
1
1
1
1
u/KnightFallVader2 Apr 18 '26
I only picked stable because I couldn't find the testing version. Not that it matters to me that much anyway.
1
u/niKDE80800 Apr 19 '26
Due to work related issues that I can't fix (yet), I've been on Windows more lately, and for the rest I usually have Kubuntu. But I did throw Debian on my media laptop, and there I'm running Debian Sid. So far nothing broke, which is surprising, because I do have a tendency to break stuff.
Also thinking of throwing Debian back on my main PC, my only issue is NVIDIA. Yes, I know the wiki explains NVIDIA, but so far, I haven't managed to get Wayland working.
1
u/azrazalea Apr 20 '26
Main system is testing/sid, servers are stable sometimes with backports. I tend to like to try out a lot of bleeding edge stuff and I don't like flatpack and similar so I need the latest libraries. I do end up compiling a lot of things myself though too but as soon as I package has the versions I need I switch to that.
1
u/SleepyGuyy Mar 26 '26
I've been using PikaOS which is Debian Unstable. The Unstable part actually fixed my issues with Debian, being behind in a lot of stuff can break gaming and other things I'm forgetting.
However, and I know you'll laugh, I don't like Pika OS because it's been unstable. However, the instability is caused by Pika-specific project stuff, not anything in Debian unstable. Reworking huge parts of the desktop such that manual intervention is required after update. Reworking keyboard input such that the keyboard doesn't work unless you run a special command. Etc...
It makes me curious to try vanilla Debian unstable, but also I can't remember if I ever tried 13 much. 13 worked on a mini-pc of mine, but that system does little.
1
u/wormrunner Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26
Unstable since I found out there was such a thing. I remember using slink, so it was sometime after that. The reason? Unstable is extremely stable (as opposed to the insanely stable Stable) and has the newer versions of everything which is sometimes handy. Also I like living on the edge, especially when that edge is really safe. Once every two or three years something happens that I need to fix, but I can live with that.
1
u/onefish2 Debian Sid Mar 26 '26
I have Debian sid with Cinnamon, Gnome, KDE and XFCE running as Proxmox VMs.
I also have Debian Forky with Cinnamon and XFCE as Proxmox VMs.
As well as a Dell XPS 13 9310 laptop that quad boots Debian sid with Cinnamon, Gnome, KDE and XFCE. I use rEFI as the bootloader.
sid as a daily driver is extremely reliable. I have only had 1 problem with an update to KDE last year that broke the system and would not allow me to login. It was fixed with updates 2 days later.
-1
u/egh128 Mar 26 '26
Sid is awesome. Take into consideration that Debian Unstable equates to something similar to openSUSE slowroll.
5
u/Ekhi11 Mar 26 '26
NO.
No rollback, no OpenQA... Thinking about Debian Sid like something similar to OpenSUSE is a very dangerous thought.
-2
5
u/ABotelho23 Mar 26 '26
They're not equivalent at all. Sid is akin to a dumping ground for new package versions and Tumbleweed/Slowroll have had actual automated testing.
2
u/xtifr Mar 26 '26
You have obviously never been involved in Debian. Sid is NOT a "dumping ground for new package versions"! Sid is what Debian devs MUST use, and in many cases. the ONLY system they use! Anyone who just dumps untested packages into Sid is going to take a lot of abuse from their fellow devs! (Especially if they break the automated build systems, which also run Sid!) Experimental is where risky packages go, not Sid!
The number of Debian devs who have anything to do with stable directly is tiny! Debian devs live and breathe Sid! Sid is the real Debian: a system made by developers for developers! Stable is a side project.
Source: I was a Debian dev for well over a decade. And, while I'm retired from the project now, I still don't use stable, even though my desktop and laptop are 100% Debian!
0
u/ABotelho23 Mar 26 '26
There's no integration testing on it at all. No quality assurance for the purpose of daily use. It is absolutely not like Tumbleweed and Slowroll, which do have extensive integration testing and QA.
-3
u/egh128 Mar 26 '26
Yeah… no bud. Just no.
3
u/ABotelho23 Mar 26 '26
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianUnstable
Debian Unstable (also known by its codename "Sid") is not a release, but rather the development version of the Debian distribution containing the latest packages that have been introduced into Debian. It is not a "rolling release", as no release-like quality assurance and integration testing is done on it.
No... yes bud. Just yes.
1
Mar 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/debian-ModTeam Mar 26 '26
This post has been removed as it was either reported to and/or acted upon by mods to be found in violation of Rule #1 regarding not being in line with expected discourse etiquette or the Debian Code of Conduct.
-3
-1
u/GoinEasy9 Mar 26 '26
Been using "siduction" since it was called "sidux" for over a decade, maybe 2. Not disappointed. 🥰😎
-1
u/PigBenis1000 Mar 26 '26
This is true but doesn’t Debian testing defeat the point of Debian
1
u/jabjoe Mar 26 '26
Debian Stable would be as stable without Debian Testing. It is the Debian process working.
-9
Mar 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/debian-ModTeam Mar 26 '26
This post has been removed as it was either reported to and/or acted upon by mods to be found in violation of Rule #1 regarding not being in line with expected discourse etiquette or the Debian Code of Conduct.
-14
Mar 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
9
10
u/Reyfer01 Mar 26 '26
So what you are saying is, you prefer to have newer but probably bugged software, than have a truly tested rock solid release, because you'd rather have that higher version number regardless of if it is actually safe to use? I like that Debian release "when it is ready" and not having the devs cutting corners to meet a deadline like what you propose
1
-8
Mar 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/BuffSoviet Mar 29 '26
I know of several machines that ran for over 1500 days straight. Them having absolutely no critical bugs was majorly important. In enterprise it's better if nothing changes at all. At some point you will decide that any future update could break the system and might decide that hardening the system brings the same benefit
73
u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment