Why LMDE?

All Gurus once were Newbies
Locked
thobin
Level 2
Level 2
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2015 8:34 pm

Why LMDE?

Post by thobin » Sun Jan 29, 2017 5:02 pm

What is the reason for a LMDE? I have used Debian and I couldn't rap my head around Gnome which is not a Debian problem per say its Gnome I don't like. It seems like a step backwards to me with the non active desktop. (I know it can be changed).

What is so different that the Mint team deems it necessary to create this version, what advantages does it have? The standard Mint point releases work so well and I do like ease of the PPAs. Is it solely the problems that people now have with Conicals business practice, or all the bloat ware that Ubuntu seems to come with? Games and Video drivers work pretty well with Mint and I did have a few problems when it came to the pure Debian distro. I guess I'm not satisfied with the brief description that the Mint team or Google gives of why. I mean int the end isn't Ubuntu a child of Debian? Is Mint going to drop Ubuntu as its base? Or it the end goal and pure Debian Mint or rebuild like Solus or Arch?

TA
Image

User avatar
xenopeek
Level 24
Level 24
Posts: 24135
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 3:58 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Why LMDE?

Post by xenopeek » Sun Jan 29, 2017 5:27 pm

Both Ubuntu and Debian are valued package bases for Linux Mint. One of the things that makes Linux Mint great is that Ubuntu and Debian are great.

With Linux Mint based on Ubuntu you have point release to get newer software. You get a newer releases of Cinnamon, MATE, KDE and Xfce (whichever you're using) and newer releases of other Linux Mint developed software like Software Manager, Update Manager and so on. Selected other software may also get a newer release when upgrading to a point release of Linux Mint (e.g., for one of the Linux Mint 17.x point releases a major upgrade for LibreOffice was included). You're on the long-term supported package base of Ubuntu and you can choose if you want to upgrade the most visible parts of your operating system to a newer release. All the point releases (18, 18.1 and future 18.2 and 18.3) use the same long-term supported package base for the core operating system and all thus get support for the same period. The benefit of Linux Mint based on Ubuntu is that it is fully compatible with Ubuntu so you can find lots of additional software repositories (PPAs) for installing more or newer software, there is a lot of information about hardware compatibility, you can use instructions meant for Ubuntu, and there is good support from commercial software especially games for Ubuntu or even Linux Mint itself (e.g., Steam and GOG respectively).

LMDE is based on Debian stable and does not have point releases. You get also newer releases of Cinnamon and MATE (whichever you're using) and newer releases of other Linux Mint developed software like Software Manager, Update Manager and so on but in a semi-rolling release fashion. Meaning you see these as available upgrades in Update Manager itself and don't need to upgrade to a point release as you do with Linux Mint. The benefit of Linux Mint based on Debian is that it is fully compatible with Debian so you can use Debian repositories (like backports and testing) for installing more or newer software, you can use instructions meant for Debian, it is arguably more stable as it is based on Debian stable while Ubuntu also imports packages from Debian unstable into its long-term supported repository and it has arguably a more strict security policy as Debian security teams first and foremost pay attention to all packages in Debian stable while Ubuntu imports certain packages from Debian unstable and for many additional packages (universe and multiverse repositories) the work is done by community maintainers who may depend on the work of the Debian security teams. Mind that stable means "no changes to functionality and with known bugs" -- not with no bugs :wink:

Ultimately both have a place and based on your intended use or need you may prefer to use the one or the other. They are both great choices.
Image

thobin
Level 2
Level 2
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2015 8:34 pm

Re: Why LMDE?

Post by thobin » Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:24 pm

So there is no goal of switching to pure Debian in the long run? I have run across a few that think they should? I'm not seeing why that would be necessary, not that I have a problem with it, other than the snails pace that Debian moves at in regards to the Kernel. (aren't they still using 3.16?)

TA
Image

User avatar
Fred Barclay
Level 12
Level 12
Posts: 4207
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 11:12 am
Location: Bumping around in the bush

Re: Why LMDE?

Post by Fred Barclay » Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:30 pm

thobin wrote:other than the snails pace that Debian moves at in regards to the Kernel. (aren't they still using 3.16?)
It's still 3.16 for Debian Jessie, but we have access to a much newer kernel via the backports:

Code: Select all

$ uname -r
4.8.0-0.bpo.2-amd64
from my Jessie machine.

I think xenopeek covered the difference pretty nicely. :) For me, a big reason I use LMDE instead of Mint is that I prefer Debian's security policies to those of Ubuntu. I also like being able to get the latest Cinnamon or MATE without having to upgrade my whole OS.
Last edited by Fred Barclay on Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
"Once you can accept the universe as matter expanding into nothing that is something, wearing stripes with plaid comes easy."
- Albert Einstein

User avatar
xenopeek
Level 24
Level 24
Posts: 24135
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 3:58 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Why LMDE?

Post by xenopeek » Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:33 pm

No, there is no plan or goal for abandoning either package base. We're happy with both. Use whichever works best for you.

As for Debian stable's kernel, indeed if you need a newer kernel for hardware enablement that is what Debian backports repository is for. It has 4.8.0 currently. Instructions for using Debian backports: viewtopic.php?f=236&t=237304#p1263673
Image

kevinthefixer
Level 4
Level 4
Posts: 278
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2015 10:36 pm

Re: Why LMDE?

Post by kevinthefixer » Wed Feb 01, 2017 10:31 pm

Word of general advice, though! Unless you have a need for a newer kernel, such as some cutting-edge hardware you just aquired, there is no advantage to upgrading to the latest-and-greatest. And while I've never had a problem with a kernel upgrade, plenty of people have trashed their entire installation doing just that--Murphy's law, don't you know. So unless you want to test-drive a Skylake processor I wouldn't bother. "When in doubt, chicken out!"

all41
Level 15
Level 15
Posts: 5695
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2013 9:12 am
Location: Computer, Car, Cage

Re: Why LMDE?

Post by all41 » Wed Feb 01, 2017 11:09 pm

kevinthefixer wrote:-Murphy's law, don't you know.
There are times when Murphy's law seems optimistic

User avatar
ChrisMW
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun May 17, 2015 6:02 am

Re: Why LMDE?

Post by ChrisMW » Mon Feb 13, 2017 12:06 pm

I've moved to the 4.9 kernel in LMDE 2 and absolutely love it. Desktop is much smoother, WiFi more responsive and VirtualBox client are noticeable faster. So I'd say that there are more reasons than just needing the kernel. It installs pretty simply from the backports, although I needed aptitude to upgrade something that Synaptic didn't want to and the upgrade app didn't offer.

Although I'm not giving guarantees, in my experience, kernels are not the hardest thing to upgrade, just don't remove the working kernel before you are sure the newer works fine. I saved me when I moved from LMDE 1 to 2, as I got into some trouble with MATE after the first move. I've had much more problems with graphic drivers, broadcom WiFi cards etc...

I also shaved off some boot time by using systemd.

LMDE works better for me, LMDE feel like Debian with the customisation I'd do because myself.

mike acker
Level 6
Level 6
Posts: 1432
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 6:29 pm
Location: Kalamazoo, MI

Re: Why LMDE?

Post by mike acker » Mon Mar 13, 2017 6:16 am

ChrisMW wrote:I've moved to the 4.9 kernel in LMDE 2 and absolutely love it. Desktop is much smoother, WiFi more responsive and VirtualBox client are noticeable faster. So I'd say that there are more reasons than just needing the kernel. It installs pretty simply from the backports, although I needed aptitude to upgrade something that Synaptic didn't want to and the upgrade app didn't offer.

Although I'm not giving guarantees, in my experience, kernels are not the hardest thing to upgrade, just don't remove the working kernel before you are sure the newer works fine. I saved me when I moved from LMDE 1 to 2, as I got into some trouble with MATE after the first move. I've had much more problems with graphic drivers, broadcom WiFi cards etc...

I also shaved off some boot time by using systemd.

LMDE works better for me, LMDE feel like Debian with the customisation I'd do because myself.
interesting
i've got the notes around someplace for the kernel update. Right now though I'm interested in developments regarding LMDE/3: we will want to start building using RYZEN chips this year and, If I get the scuttlebutt right we'll need 4.10 Kernel for full support of RYZEN

I'm on hold though "pro tem" as I like to build with APU type chips rather than installing a high-end graphics card. the high-end graphics just isn't needed except for games -- and i don't have anyone into that. Video editing is one of the most compute intensive activities I get into-- this would definitely benefit from using (e.g.) a 1700X chip..... ( 8 cores/ 16 threads ) . but 1700X -- like 1800X and 1700 -- are not APUs. I think the RYZEN APUs will be limited to 4 cores like the current offerings -- likely to be 8 threads though, i'm thinkin
¡Viva la Resistencia!

Locked

Return to “Newbie Questions”