Linux Mint Forums

I switched to LMDE instead of Ubuntu several months ago, because I was tired to do a full update every six month. The online update process never worked for me. So I really wanted something that was up-to-date and didn't require the reinstall process every 6 months.

I wanted to try Arch Linux, but opted for LMDE because I was used to Debian environment, especially apt, and because it includes a graphical interface from the box, in contrast with ArchLinux..

My first disappointment and biggest disappointment with LMDE was after running the command to see the kernel version. My surprise, the kernel version was 2.6.32, more than a year old that the latest version in http://www.kernel.org/. Big issue, because the internal card reader of my netbook was supported since the 2.6.34 version, so I have to get an external card reader or update the kernel manually. I choose the final option, and it worked. I realize that the 2.6.32 did not support either the Atom processors. The fan was always at maximum speed, creating a lot of noise, and consuming the battery faster. With the new kernel, these issues were solved.

The second issue is Firefox 4. I have a firefox package installed. I would expect that the Update Manager updates this package to its latest version. Every two months I get a new version of Chromium and Google Chrome (although the latter is from Google repos). Something remarkable happen around two weeks ago. With the feud between OpenOffice and LibreOffice, due to the purchase of the former by Oracle, most Linux distributions choose LibreOffice as its default Office suite. LMDE uninstalled the OpenOffice package, and installed LibreOffice. Why something like this doesn't happen with Firefox?

To conclude, is LMDE a rolling-release distro, even though it doesn't provides the latest version of the Linux kernel, or the latest version of its default web brouser, Mozilla Firefox? These are just two examples. Maybe there are more

Yes it certainly is...debian is just slower with getting certain things over to testing (which is what LMDE is pointed to)...which is actually better because there are less chances of breakage that way....there is nothing wrong with the current kernel and eventually we will get the newer one...i don't think you'd be gaining any major advantages with the newer one, anyway....

Of course, you need to have all 5 levels of mint update checked in order to have LMDE working the way it is supposed to in terms of getting all updates...

If you want to live on the "edge" and get certain things sooner you would have to go with say, debian sid (unstable)...but what is your rush to get things so quick? Isn't it better to have a pretty reliable rolling distro instead of one that is subject to more breakage?

So far, there have been very few breakages on LMDE with testing...isn't that preferable over being "cutting edge" ?
Don't know about you...but to me it is

Actually, i notice i have gotten plenty of very current replacement for applications i run like Evolution, Pidgin, Amarok, K3b, etc...And the current kernel runs fine...

Only program that is slow as a turtle to get newer updates in debian seems to be chromium which is why i use Chrome (from google itself) since it is my primary browser, i like to have the latest stable releases since they keep making improvements all the time with it...

phollox wrote:I switched to LMDE instead of Ubuntu several months ago, because I was tired to do a full update every six month. The online update process never worked for me. So I really wanted something that was up-to-date and didn't require the reinstall process every 6 months.

You probably get that, by going to a rolling release
--usually they tend to keep more current than a release (periodic) cycle

Any Linux release/distribution does not guarantee the latest of everything, whether that is the base system (kernel) or specific application

• Nor can anyone expect that, since which application is to be supported by keeping it up to date: your preferred choice or something that comes as part of the distribution

Compare that if you like to the commercial systems (Windows or Apple)
--can you expect the latest version of an application or system (OS) to be available as soon as possible and without any problems, such as not loading on that version of the OS you have, and so on..

• Not if they are following their supply chain, only expect updates when the vendor decides they are ready

Testing is good, and necessary

• Why the asap crows are on their own as far as support goes
  --if you need the latest version of something (kernel or application), expect some problems, that you will have to solve for yourself..

craig10x wrote:....there is nothing wrong with the current kernel and eventually we will get the newer one...i don't think you'd be gaining any major advantages with the newer one, anyway....

Actually, i notice i have gotten plenty of very current replacement for applications i run like Evolution, Pidgin, Amarok, K3b, etc...And the current kernel runs fine...

As I said, with the newer kernel I obtained support for the internal SD card reader of my netbook. Also, the newest kernel support the Atom processors, being more efficient in the administration to these low power-consumption processors. With the default kernel, the fan of my computer was always running at full speed not sure if because the kernel overheats the processor, or doesn't recognize it properly, so it sets the fan at full speed to protects it. This was noisy, and the battery lasted less time. With a newer kernel, the fan noise was gone, and the battery life increased significantly.

Yes, I prefer "stability" over "cutting edge". But I also like improvements. And sometimes you get both with more up-to-date packages.

This post wasn't a rant. Just a friendly discussion about two issues

Thanks for your replies

I think your issue with the fan is related to the fact that lmde doesn't come with out of the box hardware drivers for your GPU like Ubuntu does. I had this too, and once I got the proper nvidia drivers the fans stopped spinning like crazy and the temperature (from acpi -t) dropped significantly.

ppk wrote:I think your issue with the fan is related to the fact that lmde doesn't come with out of the box hardware drivers for your GPU like Ubuntu does. I had this too, and once I got the proper nvidia drivers the fans stopped spinning like crazy and the temperature (from acpi -t) dropped significantly.

Sounds logic. But my netbook's GPU comes from Intel. No Linux drivers from the manufacturer. But a recent kernel solved the fan issue

All is already said but you have to know that kernel 2.6.38 is in the repository now and you can install Iceweasel 4 (the debianised firefox 4) by following this link:
http://mozilla.debian.net/

You can use this repository and remove it when iceweasel 4 will be in testing

Have fun !

ppk wrote:I think your issue with the fan is related to the fact that lmde doesn't come with out of the box hardware drivers for your GPU like Ubuntu does. I had this too, and once I got the proper nvidia drivers the fans stopped spinning like crazy and the temperature (from acpi -t) dropped significantly.

Thanks a lot. I have Intel board and ATI card, but your post gave me the hint. After installing fglrx drivers,
the issue with fan driving me crazy is gone.

I think we need to define what a rolling release actually is. You can have a rolling release without having the most updated packages. The true essence of a rolling release not having a set point release ever so often but maybe having an installer dvd so you dont have to waste bandwidth getting updates every so often. While the testing repo's dont have the most bleeding edge packages it has the most stable current packages.

That is a really interesting question.

My approach is basically go with the stable stuff. For me, browsers break the rule tho.
I personally also like to fool with the latest kernal but seems like there is a good argument for
keeping the myriad parts at a stable level-
That way I can take a backup, and go play with ONE component at a time

There is such a multitude of hardware & software; I also use ATI (Rs880) but, in my case, the vanilla
support worked just fine on LMDE out of the box.
(I don't think that is the case for Mepis 8.5)
Lately (at least on Ubuntu), found myself dropping the proprietary fglrx in lieu of X.org

Howard

There is an official or recommended way to update the kernel? I update mine adding a repo, it was working perfect.
Then another update came, and my computer is slower now (I think).
I friend told me that I should look for a kernel specifically made for mi computer, if it's possible. Don't know if it's possible

phollox wrote:There is an official or recommended way to update the kernel?

I have found that following this Guide for Upgrading the Kernel works > http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.p ... 85&start=0

I think the problem is not about the "rolling release", but about how updates should work. People want stable apps, no argument about that. History has shown, that new releases of certain apps are not stable, while others are really quite stable. For example Firefox 3, 3.5 and 4 never disappointed me in terms of stability. People learned, that Mozilla software is usually high-quality, so they want the latest version as soon as it is available. Not all the software can be treated like that. Some changes may also be too dramatic to be forced automatically. For example automatically forcing users to change their office suite is too much for me. The best solution would be if the interface didn't force dramatic changes, but offered them in a nice convenient GUI, from where one could install new Firefox or switch to LibreOffice with a single button click. I am talking about update recommendations.

the solution is to use Fedora if you want to have the highest version of anything,but there are many disadvantages ...


on the other side you can install manually whatever you like in mint for instance firefox 5

loukoumas wrote:the solution is to use Fedora if you want to have the highest version of anything,but there are many disadvantages ...

What about Debian testing, Debian Sid, Arch Linux, etc? Fedora may be ahead of Ubuntu in some packages but it's not the only one. Take a look at Arch packages:
http://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update

nunol wrote:

loukoumas wrote:the solution is to use Fedora if you want to have the highest version of anything,but there are many disadvantages ...

What about Debian testing, Debian Sid, Arch Linux, etc? Fedora may be ahead of Ubuntu in some packages but it's not the only one. Take a look at Arch packages:
http://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=-last_update

it is an example my mint-friend!
I was a fedora user,and now I am a LMDE user and I respect every linux distribution -it's only matter of taste and freedom,but we should never forget that all DISTROS are LINUX!

loukoumas wrote:I was a fedora user,and now I am a LMDE user and I respect every linux distribution -it's only matter of taste and freedom,but we should never forget that all DISTROS are LINUX!

Well, not all distro are linux (or BSD based)!

http://distrowatch.com/search.php?category=BSD

nunol wrote:

loukoumas wrote:I was a fedora user,and now I am a LMDE user and I respect every linux distribution -it's only matter of taste and freedom,but we should never forget that all DISTROS are LINUX!

Well, not all distro are linux (or BSD based)!

http://distrowatch.com/search.php?category=BSD

you are right!

Yes Debian Testing is a rolling release, so is sid.

Once installed you should never have to reinstall, barring major user errors or hardware failure.

Debian was installed on my desktop back in 02/2004, I run sid with daily apt-get dist-upgrades.
I am currently using KDE4.6.2, with liquorix kernel 2.6.38-5.dmz.2-liquorix-686

How much newer do you want Firefox/Iceweasel to be?
$ apt-cache policy iceweasel
iceweasel:
Installed: 5.0~a2+20110509042008-1
Candidate: 5.0~a2+20110509042008-1
Version table:
*** 5.0~a2+20110509042008-1 0
500 http://mozilla.debian.net/ experimental/iceweasel-5.0 i386 Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
4.0.1-2 0
1 http://mirrors.kernel.org/debian/ experimental/main i386 Packages


Google Chrome dev version
$ apt-cache policy google-chrome-unstable
google-chrome-unstable:
Installed: 12.0.742.30-r84361
Candidate: 12.0.742.30-r84361
Version table:
*** 12.0.742.30-r84361 0
500 http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable/main i386 Packages

craigevil wrote:Debian was installed on my desktop back in 02/2004, I run sid with daily apt-get dist-upgrades.

Great. I am also thinking about moving to Mint Debian. How many times did you encounter a situation since 2004, where your sid stopped working or had a major problem due to updates? Does it happen often?