Basing Mint on Ubuntu vs Debian

[beng]

Just thought to start a discussion on the pros and cons of basing Mint on Ubuntu instead of Debian. Yes there is the Linux Mint Debian Edition (LMDE) but that seems like a testing branch and not the main version of Mint and only comes with Cinnamon and not Xfce or Mate, For now it seems Ubuntu is what the main version is based on. I have seen some videos on Youtube suggesting that Mint main edition should be based on Debian instead of Ubuntu as Ubuntu stuff that needs to be stripped out to make it good (eg. snapd). What are your thoughts on that?

My own thoughts are that it is still good to keep Mint based on Ubuntu because of the large amount of third party software that is made for Ubuntu. Many primarily Windows programms have an Ubuntu version as their only Linux version and do not support other distros, so if Mint is based on Debian and not Ubuntu, Mint users will have less software to choose from. Examples include Atlas VPN client and Warzone 2100 game.

As it stands, Mint being based on Ubuntu gives its users access to probably the largest pool of Linux software, whilst avoiding the parts of Ubuntu that are undesirable.

[spamegg]

Hey there,

Yes there is the Linux Mint Debian Edition (LMDE) but that seems like a testing branch and not the main version of Mint

Not quite true. LMDE has all the same features that Mint Cinnamon (Ubuntu) has. LMDE is not treated as a testing branch, or a second-class citizen. It's just a bit slower, it comes out 1-2 months after Mint Ubuntu version. In that regard, the Ubuntu version is used for "testing" before the Debian version! Mint BETA releases and bug squash rushes happen on Ubuntu versions first.

and only comes with Cinnamon and not Xfce or Mate

There is a good reason for that. Mint does not develop Xfce or Mate. Mint devs want to make sure that Cinnamon + Mint apps work outside of Ubuntu (on Debian, Fedora, Arch etc.) So I guess you could consider that "testing" in some sense... but not really.

My own thoughts are that it is still good to keep Mint based on Ubuntu because of the large amount of third party software that is made for Ubuntu.

Agreed!

As it stands, Mint being based on Ubuntu gives its users access to probably the largest pool of Linux software, whilst avoiding the parts of Ubuntu that are undesirable.

Exactly!

[JosephM]

Not quite true. LMDE has all the same features that Mint Cinnamon (Ubuntu) has

Actually, that's not true LMDE is missing some obvious things from Ubuntu like the Driver Manager. You seem to misunderstand the main reason that LMDE exists. It's a backup plan in case Ubuntu becomes unviable as a base somewhere down the road. That's why there is only a Cinnamon version. The team doesn't want to waste dev time ensuring multiple DE's work on it at this point.

As for testing on other distros, there are team members who use other distros that Cinnamon is available on. Arch users actually get the new Cinnamon versions first and provide valuable feedback and bug reporting before it even gets in a Mint release.

[bin]

I see Ubuntu as following Microsoft's practices esp when it comes to snap packages.

Get 'em hooked then make it the standard.

Everyone has to follow or they don't get into Ubuntu and so in 5 years time it will either be Ubuntu or source based and that's your lot.

[MiZoG]

We have had this debate time and again.
Some people prefer "rhetoric" to facts.
If we are interested in the latter, Ubuntu-based main edition still has an edge over Debian-based but I will admit a very slight one

1. Most important: graphics stack.
Debian Stable is very conservative when it comes to offer upgrades to mesa or proprietary nvidia driver. For the current release cycle we are stuck with Mesa 22.3.6 and nvidia 525.x. Mint main based on an overall older than Bookworm Ubuntu base-system benefits from backported Mesa 23.0.4 and nvidia 535.x (545 is already on the "proposed" LTS channel).
2. Proprietary stuff
Ubuntu still gets support for a lot more proprietary software though generally not critical for most users. From Rocm amd drivers to dell repos, from old obscure card-readers to new Intel video cameras.
3. More "robust" kernel management
More kernel series available and more often updated. Kernel updates via Update Manager on Mint has been made easy thanks to Ubuntu. A missing feature on LMDE.
4. Third-party repos / PPAs
There is a ton of third party repositories available for Ubuntu but this has become much less an issue for Debian with the rise of distro-agnostic package managers like Flatpak. Storage requirements might be a shortcoming for some Flatpak users, Flatpak sandboxing is considered an improvement over PPAs by others. Desktop integration not really a problem any longer.

Main advantage of Debian Stable certainly is stability. Debian Bookworm at beta had been more stable in my tests than Ubuntu Jammy two months after its release. But this applies to Ubuntu main, or flavours, not Mint. Mint 21 has been stable right from the get-go and Mint 20 and Mint 19 before that (I started using Mint as my daily driver with 18.2/18.3). Most bugs on Ubuntu were related to their mixed-bag of Gnome desktop. After a few months, especially after a couple of point releases, Ubuntu LTSes tend to be as solid-rock as Debian Stable in my experience. Major Mint upgrades are released a couple of months after Ubuntu LTS and Mint DEs are always much more stable than Ubuntu's initial releases. So, no. Stability is not a problem for main Mint.
Latest Mint has inherited a couple of somewhat serious problems from Ubuntu: installer bug on legacy systems (it takes manual partitioning to work around it) and breaking of some installations that enabled secure boot (now solved).

IMHO Mint users with older than 2 years hardware will find themselves not really missing much if anything at all when they install LMDE. And the opposite, there is no reason to divert new users from main Mint to LMDE.

Many users make an "ideological" argument against Ubuntu. As I have tried to show, I do believe there is no "practical" argument against main Mint. I find the anti-corporate anti-snap and so on line of argumentation as "unreasonable" simply because main Mint is free from all controversial choices made by Canonical and affect Ubuntu "upstream".

I'm not enthusiastic at all about Canonical's direction but comparisons between Canonical and Microsoft are infelicitous, not historically accurate. There are no inherently good companies. And Canonical is driven by profit. But Canonical promoted Linux desktop to an unprecedented level while Microsoft has created a mind-blowing monopoly that is against consumers, industries, public interest not to speak of democratic freedom of choice. Many Linux users are being vocal about Canonical but keep silent about Valve's incomparably greater impact since Valve's is perceived as favouring Linux adoption at least for the time being.

Last, Debian is not foreign to Ubuntu. Active or former Canonical employees are among the most active Debian maintainers and developers. Debian and Ubuntu security teams collaborate closely. Most optimizations of Debian find their way into Ubuntu and vice versa. Debian packages still comprise the largest part of Ubuntu itself. Moreover Debian has become a much more user-friendly distro under the influence of Ubuntu's paradigm. Debian was "unusable" by normal desktop users in 2000s before Ubuntu's breakthrough. Simplistic dichotomies, social media animosities, factionalist approaches do not correspond to real relations and channels of communication on the ground.

[Hoser Rob]

My own thoughts are that it is still good to keep Mint based on Ubuntu because of the large amount of third party software that is made for Ubuntu.

Agreed!

As it stands, Mint being based on Ubuntu gives its users access to probably the largest pool of Linux software, whilst avoiding the parts of Ubuntu that are undesirable.

Exactly!

I agree, though if Ubuntu moves more in the direction of snaps this may be debatable in the future.

I also don't think there'd be that much difference between a Ubuntu base and a Debian Testing one.

[spamegg]

I also don't think there'd be that much difference between a Ubuntu base and a Debian Testing one.

Yeah, it's pretty much the same maybe with some more packages on Ubuntu.

[Newbie221]

Deleted

[SMG]

After doing my research on switching to Linux, I was left with the impression that Debian had the greatest amount of software available.
I started out using Mint but just switch to Debian12 for that reason.

Debian packages can be used on both LMDE and Linux Mint so there was no need to switch to Debian 12 if that was your only reason.

[Newbie221]

Deleted

[SMG]

It wasn't ..... wanted to do some exploring and Debian seemed to be a good challenge for me.

Okay. However, what you describe is not related at all to the issue in this topic. The issue is which version of Linux Mint to use, the Linux Mint version based on Ubuntu or Linux Mint Debian Edition and discussing the differences between the two. Announcing you are not using Linux Mint for a reason which is not even valid doesn't pertain to this discussion.