30 points dgavrilov 1 hour ago 31 comments
eu 59 minutes ago | parent
antonyh 45 minutes ago | parent
philipallstar 43 minutes ago | parent
esseph 40 minutes ago | parent
Absolutely. Injecting ads into the desktop and cli, having a package manager that runs as a root service, their decades of poor upgrade testing, etc.
I have never found them to be trustworthy when other, better options exist.
torben-friis 39 minutes ago | parent
If so, why pay for that rather than upgrading? Honest question.
esseph 37 minutes ago | parent
LTS also only covers core OS components with security updates, not the 30k+ packages available in the repo...
torben-friis 21 minutes ago | parent
sverhagen 11 minutes ago | parent
And this, among other things, is why I like the agency that small companies should be able to offer you.
stackskipton 21 minutes ago | parent
All applications need maintenance. Either you do it at application level to keep on top of its dependencies or you do it at OS/3rd party level. Either way, someone wants to get paid.
esseph 19 minutes ago | parent
Yes, that is the entire point of what I said.
> most stuff these days could probably be shoved into a container and thus extremely distro/version agnostic
It depends on if it's an in-house app or managed and built by a 3rd party (may void contract). Also depends on the risk of life/monetary loss if something goes sideways.
sekh60 36 minutes ago | parent
stackskipton 32 minutes ago | parent
That's well spelled out here: https://ubuntu.com/about/release-cycle
You can also just upgrade your LTS and continue to get support for free.
blablabla123 32 minutes ago | parent
liamgm 11 minutes ago | parent
erelong 32 minutes ago | parent
(I'm fine with Wayland for those who want it but it still breaks things I've used)
OroPla 30 minutes ago | parent
Instead, I'll probably move everything over to Void next.
calgoo 3 minutes ago | parent
jadar 29 minutes ago | parent
ilaksh 21 minutes ago | parent
It's clear to me that Ubuntu is no longer in fashion. So what is popular these days? From what I heard, I think it's Fedora or Arch (such as Omarchy), but only with some slick UI stuff like Hyprland and Caelestia.
josteink 16 minutes ago | parent
Ubuntu used to be the Debian that just worked without tweaking.
Today I find Debian to be the one which’s works without tweaking, and Ubuntu the one where one has to undo/disable lots of Ubuntuisms.
So for me: Server is Debian. Laptop is Arch.
hbn 16 minutes ago | parent
I ended up installing Mint and it's Good Enough™
jckahn 12 minutes ago | parent
bayindirh 6 minutes ago | parent
Debatable.
- Snaps
- Replacing something battle-tested with something written in Rust, MIT licensed and with 140 CVEs (uutils).
- Pulling rugs and replacing debs with snapswithout telling it, because "it creates positive pressur e on the snap team and drives the quality higher".
- Promising to open source Snap store to allow alternative stores and forgetting what they had said.
- Bullying Debian to push their changes to Debian to offload software maintenance (they wanted to make netplan the default in Debian, for example).
... etc, etc.bayindirh 9 minutes ago | parent
If the person can put in the work and doesn't need bleeding edge software: Debian Stable.
If the person can put in the work, the machine is in a secure environment, not going to serve anything and is a desktop system: Debian Testing.
If the person can't put the work and wants something working: Fedora.
If the person wants to dive deeper: Arch, Gentoo, LFS.
aframemodular 20 minutes ago | parent
josteink 19 minutes ago | parent
Previous releases was MIR, Upstart, Snapd… This release it’s no X11 and GNU Coreutils replaced by buggy Rust rewrites.
Debian feels more like pure FOSS and in general just better. None of that icky flavour in the back of your mouth.
throw0101c 14 minutes ago | parent
* https://packages.ubuntu.com/stonking/coreutils
See "Ubuntu 26.10 completes transition to Rust-based coreutils" from last month: