<DECIDED> LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testing.

Discuss non-support related topics related to LMDE.
Forum rules
Before you post please read this

Would you like LMDE to be based on Debian Stable instead of Debian Testing in the future?

Poll ended at Tue Jul 15, 2014 10:24 am

Yes
44
55%
No
36
45%
 
Total votes : 80

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby Zill on Sun Jul 27, 2014 12:32 pm

"Rolling" to me means that application versions are continually changing and this model greatly appeals to users who always want the "latest and greatest" software. However, the price of using a rolling distro is frequent breakage, with both major and minor problems. While an experienced user with a non-mission critical system may accept this risk, and possibly even enjoy the challenge of fixing things, this model is not suitable for all users.

OTOH, users who simply want a reliable system that works may well prefer a fixed-release distro, such as LMDE based on Debian stable. While the software may be a bit old, it should be very solid and require little maintenance, other than installing occasional security updates. Users who rely on their machine will appreciate this stability!

While a rolling release obviously never needs to be reinstalled (apart from after severe breakage!), a fixed-release often generally benefits from re-installation when the next release is available. This has been demonstrated many times by Ubuntu who have offered an upgrade path but this has often failed for one reason or another.

IMO the problem with upgrading a fixed-release is mainly due to two reasons: (1) Users often install packages from dubious sources such as PPA's or different releases and (2) System file structures and config files can change between releases.

If LMDE does move to Debian stable then I suggest it will be necessary for the upgrade process to be totally foolproof to ensure that all users can easily upgrade without the risk of breaking their system. This is the "Holy Grail" that would show that LMDE can offer the stability and ease of use that many users want.
User avatar
Zill
Level 2
Level 2
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2011 11:15 am
Location: Lincolnshire, UK

Linux Mint is funded by ads and donations.
 

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby killer de bug on Sun Jul 27, 2014 12:49 pm

tek_heretik wrote:lol, anyway, rolling has become a blanket-term for not having to re-install.

No this is just for you. And that's the problem. There is an official definition, please use it. That's the basis of communication :wink:

tek_heretik wrote:You did read the part about system level OS directory changes, etc, right?

I don't remember this. A link please? :)
And honestly, I'm pretty sure you're not concerned by this, as you do not handle a server...
If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. [Isaac Newton]
User avatar
killer de bug
Level 7
Level 7
 
Posts: 1808
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: Austria

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby py-thon on Sun Jul 27, 2014 12:51 pm

Crewp wrote:the move to stable would give the dev's a little more time to polish LMDE.

There would hardly be anything left to polish, that's what so intriguing to the developers. It's not like now where LMDE with each UP is a comparatively current snapshot of Debian Testing, which has to be tested by Mint, because it is taken from Debian Testing and has only been slightly tested in sid. This takes time and thus rarely happens (LMDE started with three UPs a year and now is down to half that).
With LMDE stable you basically take Debian stable (which has already been thoroughly tested by lots of people from Debian) add a pinch of Mint (packages already existing for Mint's main edition, which don't need that much adaption if any) and call it a distribution. This has to be done every other year. In between Debian's repos deliver a few security updates and some backported software and on Mint's part there is hardly any maintenance necessary. This will sure give them "a little more time", but they probably won't use it to polish LMDE.
Tower: LMDE Mate 64bit - Netbook: LMDE Mate 32bit
py-thon
Level 4
Level 4
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:24 pm
Location: Paraguay

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby killer de bug on Sun Jul 27, 2014 12:52 pm

Zill wrote:If LMDE does move to Debian stable then I suggest it will be necessary for the upgrade process to be totally foolproof to ensure that all users can easily upgrade without the risk of breaking their system. This is the "Holy Grail" that would show that LMDE can offer the stability and ease of use that many users want.

This is offered by Debian... :wink:
If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. [Isaac Newton]
User avatar
killer de bug
Level 7
Level 7
 
Posts: 1808
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: Austria

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby py-thon on Sun Jul 27, 2014 1:07 pm

killer de bug wrote:
tek_heretik wrote:lol, anyway, rolling has become a blanket-term for not having to re-install.

No this is just for you.

Wrong, it is not just for him. Rolling releases are generally considered to have "no need to reinstall the operating system, as is (usually) the case with upgrading between versions of a standard release.", see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_re ... g_releases . I admit that Wikipedia contains loads of rubbish, but in this case they are right, that's the way a rolling release is seen.
Tower: LMDE Mate 64bit - Netbook: LMDE Mate 32bit
py-thon
Level 4
Level 4
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:24 pm
Location: Paraguay

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby killer de bug on Sun Jul 27, 2014 1:14 pm

py-thon wrote:Wrong, it is not just for him. Rolling releases are generally considered to have "no need to reinstall the operating system, as is (usually) the case with upgrading between versions of a standard release.", see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_re ... g_releases . I admit that Wikipedia contains loads of rubbish, but in this case they are right, that's the way a rolling release is seen.


It's only a consequence, not a propriety.

Debian Stable is not a rolling releases, but you don't have to reinstall it. You can upgrade between version. But it's not a rolling release.

Reducing a rolling release to: you don't have to reinstall is wrong.
If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. [Isaac Newton]
User avatar
killer de bug
Level 7
Level 7
 
Posts: 1808
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: Austria

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby py-thon on Sun Jul 27, 2014 1:27 pm

killer de bug wrote:It's only a consequence, not a propriety.

This consequence of not having to reinstall to a lot of people is the most important property of rolling releases.
killer de bug wrote:Debian Stable is not a rolling releases, but you don't have to reinstall it. You can upgrade between version. But it's not a rolling release.

This is exactly what the brackets "(usually)" in my quoted link are for.
Last edited by py-thon on Sun Jul 27, 2014 1:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Tower: LMDE Mate 64bit - Netbook: LMDE Mate 32bit
py-thon
Level 4
Level 4
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:24 pm
Location: Paraguay

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby KBD47 on Sun Jul 27, 2014 1:40 pm

Zill wrote:"Rolling" to me means that application versions are continually changing and this model greatly appeals to users who always want the "latest and greatest" software. However, the price of using a rolling distro is frequent breakage, with both major and minor problems. While an experienced user with a non-mission critical system may accept this risk, and possibly even enjoy the challenge of fixing things, this model is not suitable for all users.

OTOH, users who simply want a reliable system that works may well prefer a fixed-release distro, such as LMDE based on Debian stable. While the software may be a bit old, it should be very solid and require little maintenance, other than installing occasional security updates. Users who rely on their machine will appreciate this stability!

While a rolling release obviously never needs to be reinstalled (apart from after severe breakage!), a fixed-release often generally benefits from re-installation when the next release is available. This has been demonstrated many times by Ubuntu who have offered an upgrade path but this has often failed for one reason or another.

IMO the problem with upgrading a fixed-release is mainly due to two reasons: (1) Users often install packages from dubious sources such as PPA's or different releases and (2) System file structures and config files can change between releases.

If LMDE does move to Debian stable then I suggest it will be necessary for the upgrade process to be totally foolproof to ensure that all users can easily upgrade without the risk of breaking their system. This is the "Holy Grail" that would show that LMDE can offer the stability and ease of use that many users want.


It's Sunday here and I feel like saying "Amen" :-)
Ubuntu breakages from Upgrades is well known. I have only had one successful Ubuntu release upgrade. I think with Ubuntu the fact they make so many changes to Unity between releases is an issue. Xfce and KDE desktop versions of Ubuntu seem to have better release upgrade experiences.
Debian is a different animal. I have had successful upgrades even between Stable-Testing-Sid. I think if Mint handles it correctly it could be painless to upgrade between Stable releases.
We have to lose the idea of Rolling Releases just meaning leaving an OS on a machine. If that were the case, CentOS is one heck of a great 'rolling release' since you can leave it on a computer for 10 years, basically the life of many PC's lol!
KBD47
Level 6
Level 6
 
Posts: 1028
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:03 am

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby killer de bug on Sun Jul 27, 2014 1:50 pm

KBD47 wrote: We have to lose the idea of Rolling Releases just meaning leaving an OS on a machine. If that were the case, CentOS is one heck of a great 'rolling release' since you can leave it on a computer for 10 years, basically the life of many PC's lol!

Thank you! I was starting to be desperate :lol:
If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. [Isaac Newton]
User avatar
killer de bug
Level 7
Level 7
 
Posts: 1808
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: Austria

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby Crewp on Sun Jul 27, 2014 2:03 pm

py-thon wrote:
Crewp wrote:the move to stable would give the dev's a little more time to polish LMDE.

There would hardly be anything left to polish, that's what so intriguing to the developers. It's not like now where LMDE with each UP is a comparatively current snapshot of Debian Testing, which has to be tested by Mint, because it is taken from Debian Testing and has only been slightly tested in sid. This takes time and thus rarely happens (LMDE started with three UPs a year and now is down to half that).
With LMDE stable you basically take Debian stable (which has already been thoroughly tested by lots of people from Debian) add a pinch of Mint (packages already existing for Mint's main edition, which don't need that much adaption if any) and call it a distribution. This has to be done every other year. In between Debian's repos deliver a few security updates and some backported software and on Mint's part there is hardly any maintenance necessary. This will sure give them "a little more time", but they probably won't use it to polish LMDE.


I hear what your saying, but I guess what I'm thinking is extra time to improve Cinnamon, Mint tools, etc. Thus giving us LMDE user's a more polished OS. The Mint team would be able to work on things maybe only they dreamed about before, but now have the time to implement.
Image
User avatar
Crewp
Level 5
Level 5
 
Posts: 710
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 8:36 pm
Location: Connecticut

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby xenopeek on Sun Jul 27, 2014 2:03 pm

Zill wrote:If LMDE does move to Debian stable then I suggest it will be necessary for the upgrade process to be totally foolproof to ensure that all users can easily upgrade without the risk of breaking their system. This is the "Holy Grail" that would show that LMDE can offer the stability and ease of use that many users want.

This won't be possible. Sure, for average users it won't be a problem. Those that are just using the standard repositories, and haven't added any repositories or installed any packages from outside the repositories (the target users for LMDE based on Debian stable IMHO). Breakage occurs where users go and add repositories or install packages from outside the repository for whatever reason. You can't test against that, you can't (reasonably) write the upgrader to handle all such edge-cases. I'll tell you, there are LMDE users using Ubuntu PPAs :)

Dependency hell is just around the corner when trying to upgrade to a next stable release on a system that has been polluted like that. You can't expect an upgrade to go flawlessly in such cases without following a guide similar to the one now linked here a few times on how to upgrade from Debian 6 to 7. You could of course write something that checks if you can do an automatic upgrade (you only have the standard repositories, and all installed packages come from there), but even then you have to consider your specific hardware and how perhaps your hardware might be an edge case that is not as well supported on a next stable release (it happens).

Still, if LMDE would move to Debian stable there would then be 2+ years for the developers to consider this challenge :)
User avatar
xenopeek
Level 21
Level 21
 
Posts: 14861
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 3:58 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby xenopeek on Sun Jul 27, 2014 2:11 pm

py-thon wrote:
Crewp wrote:With LMDE stable you basically take Debian stable (which has already been thoroughly tested by lots of people from Debian) add a pinch of Mint (packages already existing for Mint's main edition, which don't need that much adaption if any) and call it a distribution. This has to be done every other year. In between Debian's repos deliver a few security updates and some backported software and on Mint's part there is hardly any maintenance necessary. This will sure give them "a little more time", but they probably won't use it to polish LMDE.

I doubt this is where LMDE stable is intended to go. Like Linux Mint, I'd expect LMDE stable to get two (for the user optional) release per year--at least upgrading to newer Cinnamon and MATE release, upgrading to newer versions of the Mint tools, and perhaps like Linux Mint also upgrading other important applications to newer version.

It's the same shift you see with Linux Mint; instead of scrabbling to push out a release on a new base every 6 months, the team can work to bring improvements to a base that doesn't move much for 2 years.

Same for LMDE stable; instead of scrabbling to push out an update pack twice a year, they could bring improvements to a base that doesn't move much for 2 years.

It allows the developers to work on what Linux Mint adds, instead of continually working to move to a new base and playing catchup to have software that is a little less old.
User avatar
xenopeek
Level 21
Level 21
 
Posts: 14861
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 3:58 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby vvarlock on Sun Jul 27, 2014 9:03 pm

I voted no.

Until I came across LMDE, I used a mix of Debian Stable and Testing (that's Debian, not a mint or ubuntu derivative) simply because some of the applications I use need newer libraries than what is offered in Debian Stable. The reason I switched to LMDE was because it took a lot of the burden off of my shoulders -- I no longer needed to manage the Testing libraries myself.

If LMDE becomes Stable based I'll probably switch back to using vanilla Debian.
vvarlock
Level 1
Level 1
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 11:01 pm

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby tek_heretik on Sun Jul 27, 2014 10:03 pm

killer de bug wrote:
tek_heretik wrote:lol, anyway, rolling has become a blanket-term for not having to re-install.

No this is just for you. And that's the problem. There is an official definition, please use it. That's the basis of communication :wink:

Don't single me out and please don't talk to me like that, I've seen experienced and n00bs alike use the term rolling to describe the whole gamut, actual rolling and upgradeable. Trust me, now that I've been schooled by a Mint overlord (FYI, I don't run any hand-holding Ubuntu spyware), I will be sure not to misuse the term ROLLING ever again your highness. :lol:

killer de bug wrote:
tek_heretik wrote:You did read the part about system level OS directory changes, etc, right?

I don't remember this. A link please? :)
And honestly, I'm pretty sure you're not concerned by this, as you do not handle a server...

How do you know what I do or don't do, you can see through internet wires and fibre optic cables now?! That's a special talent, you could market that. As for your link, YOU claimed you read the very same page I did, I guess you just selectively glanced at what YOU wanted to see to make your point. :roll:
Edit: HERE is your link, many posts ago, lol. :roll: :lol:
Core 2 Quad Q9550(2.83GHz), 2 Intel 520 series SSDs Raid 0 (2x120GB), 1TB Seagate storage HDD, 8GB Kingston Hyper X, 23" LG LED, etc, running ONLY 64-bit Linux. I don't like Microsoft AND Apple, too pricey and pushy.
User avatar
tek_heretik
Level 3
Level 3
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:39 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby killer de bug on Mon Jul 28, 2014 4:04 am

tek_heretik wrote:How do you know what I do or don't do, you can see through internet wires and fibre optic cables now?! That's a special talent, you could market that.

From the questions you ask, I can guess what kind of use you have with a Linux system. There was nothing offending here... :wink:

tek_heretik wrote: As for your link, YOU claimed you read the very same page I did, I guess you just selectively glanced at what YOU wanted to see to make your point. :roll:
Edit: HERE is your link, many posts ago, lol. :roll: :lol:

And I am the one judging here... :lol:
First of all I read almost all your link. But I don't remember precisely where this is written:

tek_heretik wrote:You did read the part about system level OS directory changes, etc, right?

So now, again, my question is, where precisely in the link is it written?
If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. [Isaac Newton]
User avatar
killer de bug
Level 7
Level 7
 
Posts: 1808
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: Austria

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby Chris M on Mon Jul 28, 2014 8:16 am

https://lists.debian.org/debian-kernel/ ... 00361.html

It's almost a lock now that Jessie will use the 3.16 kernel. A major reason given is Ubuntu 14.10's use of kernel 3.16 and "Ubuntu kernel team [support] for about 15-18 months after distro release (October 2014)".

This would seem to be another good reason to go Stable.
Chris M
Level 2
Level 2
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 10:01 pm

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby tek_heretik on Mon Jul 28, 2014 3:04 pm

killer de bug wrote:
tek_heretik wrote:How do you know what I do or don't do, you can see through internet wires and fibre optic cables now?! That's a special talent, you could market that.

From the questions you ask, I can guess what kind of use you have with a Linux system. There was nothing offending here... :wink:

First of all, stop winking at me, I don't bat for your 'team', you're not cute or funny. Secondly, you are again assuming you know my skill level, if reading a few lines in a forum is an indication, that makes YOU a rude, condescending @$$#013. You are fishing for information, all you need to know is my setupS are far more complicated than your Mint install. :lol: FYI, I don't use Mint, I used to (among others) years ago, I switched long before Ubuntu turned out to be a secret spyware installer/data miner. :roll:

killer de bug wrote:
tek_heretik wrote: As for your link, YOU claimed you read the very same page I did, I guess you just selectively glanced at what YOU wanted to see to make your point. :roll:
Edit: HERE is your link, many posts ago, lol. :roll: :lol:

And I am the one judging here... :lol:
First of all I read almost all your link. But I don't remember precisely where this is written:

"But I don't remember precisely where this is written" :roll: :lol: , so that means you either 1) can't read, 2) have mediocre reading ability, but a comprehension problem, 3) you bark before you can backup your mouth. I doesn't matter now anyway because your last post is proof you are a tool. The disputed information is clearly there for others to see you either don't understand it or just simply can't read. NOW who's skill level is in question?! :lol:

killer de bug wrote:
tek_heretik wrote:You did read the part about system level OS directory changes, etc, right?

So now, again, my question is, where precisely in the link is it written?

See above.

I don't have time or energy to waste on somebody like you, I conceded many posts back about the rolling thing (which is quite common actually, it's misused a lot by a lot of people, since it seems you have nothing better to do, maybe you should hunt them down too and get elitist(see skill level above :lol: )/condescending on their @$$3$), but yet you still choose to berate and insult. You're a feminine hygiene product named after a period late in the day during the middle of the year, my guess is you won't even be able to figure that one out, whoosh, right over your head. Unlike you, I don't judge my self worth by how many newbies you think you are impressing with your $#1+, in the Mint forum of all places (If this were the Arch, Gentoo or Slack forums, this would be a little different), I could care less if I get banned from here, you on the other hand, your pathetic little life would most likely fall apart and you would jump off a bridge.

I thought there was no drama allowed on this forum? How did you survive here this long?
Core 2 Quad Q9550(2.83GHz), 2 Intel 520 series SSDs Raid 0 (2x120GB), 1TB Seagate storage HDD, 8GB Kingston Hyper X, 23" LG LED, etc, running ONLY 64-bit Linux. I don't like Microsoft AND Apple, too pricey and pushy.
User avatar
tek_heretik
Level 3
Level 3
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:39 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby ardouos on Tue Jul 29, 2014 7:08 am

I voted no. I like the idea of LMDE following testing, if people wanted a low maintenance system that is Mint, just use the official version... There are plenty of distributions out there that are based of Debian stable. But there are very few which are based off testing.

All that would happen is that people would just start crying for more up to date packages. Or people forcing certain upgrades breaking their system. Major upgrades between releases may also cause lots of dependency issues making re-installing the only option like the Ubuntu release (wasn't the idea of LMDE was to be a semi rolling-release?). I am also concerned about the people who enjoy following the testing/ unstable repo off Debian as I am not too sure of the outcome and how that would affect them.

In the end, it is for the benefit of the project for what the majority of the users want and what the Mint think is the best outcome of their distro. But please think about it before making the leap.
Debian Testing - Xfce
ardouos
Level 1
Level 1
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 6:36 am

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby ardouos on Tue Jul 29, 2014 7:15 am

vvarlock wrote:I voted no.

Until I came across LMDE, I used a mix of Debian Stable and Testing (that's Debian, not a mint or ubuntu derivative) simply because some of the applications I use need newer libraries than what is offered in Debian Stable. The reason I switched to LMDE was because it took a lot of the burden off of my shoulders -- I no longer needed to manage the Testing libraries myself.

If LMDE becomes Stable based I'll probably switch back to using vanilla Debian.


If you do go back to Debian, do yourself a favour and do not mix repos.
Debian Testing - Xfce
ardouos
Level 1
Level 1
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 6:36 am

Re: Would you like LMDE to be based on Stable, not on Testin

Postby kurotsugi on Tue Jul 29, 2014 2:56 pm

First of all, stop winking at me, I don't bat for your 'team', you're not cute or funny.

the discussion is fair and nice but let's take a deep breath here :3

I can see that you're trying to be as neutral as you could so please don't take it into 1 vs 1 battle. I rarely see you here so that you should know that our little friend, killer, have tremendous love for LMDE and his tendency to defend LMDE from all kinds of criticism is well known here. if you want to continue the discussion nicely you should follow the arguments of other member of the "pro" side such as KBD, xeno, or crewp's arguments.
kurotsugi
Level 5
Level 5
 
Posts: 891
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 3:54 am

Linux Mint is funded by ads and donations.
 
PreviousNext

Return to Open Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests