Some mix of wrong and right, the exact proportions of which I’ll leave as an exercise to the reader.

  • Thief@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    There is a reason some of us chose to support Debian and its model of allowing downstream companies like Ubuntu (Canonical) to give back up to the open source father. And this is it. We dont need to compromise here. We already have a system that works perfectly and provides a choice for what suits you. If you are an enterprise then try Ubuntu instead of RHEL. If you are a home user you dont need enterprise support and can help us log bug reports and create the next version of Trixie. We need more testers and we have fought this long fight and proven we wont give up. What other proof do you need?

    • redcalcium@c.calciumlabs.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      I got a feeling that the kind of people that use Rocky or Alma linux would have a heart attack dealing with snap on ubuntu. Maybe they’re better off switching to Debian LTS instead.

      • warmaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        As an inexperienced user, I can tell you that Debian is way harder to use than most people think. Out of the box, the distro is pretty bare ones. I’m having a blast using an Arch based distro, but on Debian I had to do everything manually. Stable is freaking old and unstable has lots of limitations, Docker for example is a true pain.

        Ubuntu, Mint, Zorin, POP OS, are way better than Debian for users like me.

          • pwnna@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            “I hate configuring Linux distros which is why I use arch btw”

        • reddit_sux@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Stable is freaking old and unstable.

          I ll give you old but not at all unstable, wonder what instability have you found in LTS.

          • JuxtaposedJaguar@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            A lot of people (incorrectly) equate “stable” with “bug-free”. So conversely, having bugs would be “unstable”.

          • Sir Aramis@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Pretty sure the whole statement is

            Stable is freaking old, and unstable has lots of limitations

            I don’t think they’re saying Debian LTS is unstable.

            • warmaster@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Exactly what my bad wording meant to say. Thank you for your extraordinary reading comprehension.

        • Reef@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’m having a blast using an Arch based distro, but on Debian I had to do everything manually

          how???

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is a reason some of us chose to support Debian

      It’s amazing how some people have to learn the lesson that you can only trust non-profit foundations, not for-profit corporations, over and over again, and then even then it still somehow never seems to stick.