On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 10:22 AM D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
This Red Hat change concerns me. snip
It feels as if RH steers the future of Linux by making so many contributions.
- Ubuntu LTS + fresh Ubuntu has been pretty good. I've had more problems with package updates on Ubuntu than of Fedora, but it has been pretty good. Distro version upgrades have been good but not perfect in my modest experience.
Canonical has repeatedly acted in ways that offend or scare me. So Ubuntu, although easy, feels like a potential trap.
Found this to be true - - - - spent a lot of time a number of years ago looking into LXD - - - the snap environment is one that NEVER will be seen here again if I can help it. Canonical is, imo, desperately looking for ways to monetize their brand - - - - - someone's just have to have more $$$$$$$$$.
- debian Stable + Testing + Unstable. I don't have much experience with debian. I fear that the lack of full-time paid engineers might reduce the safety relative to RH (that could easily just be FUD). debian's goals are good by me.
So: I'm thinking of switching to debian.
I was with Debian for over 10 years - - - have now switched to Devuan - - - thereby getting rid of another item of 'control'.
I'd like to learn from others. How do you choose to solve these problems? Maybe some of them are non-problems.
The problem is that the small encroachments don't tend to isolate - - they tend to grow - - - somewhat like microbes! (With similar results in my experience!).
================
Giles has a problem with needing a stable distro with a more recent FireFox. I suggested, against my preferences, that this might be a perfect use for Snaps/Flatpacks.
Snaps are a system controlling adventure - - - be aware of this BEFORE starting down that road. Haven't used flatpacks. I find that browsers are needing updates almost on a daily basis. Am wondering if there is a way of reducing the 'encroachment' of the nefarious bits of cruft adhering to all browsers (at least as far as I see).
I wonder if I should be using a stable distro everywhere but with containerized upgraded packages where they matter. I yet don't think so.
The rest of my family uses Fedora on their workstations. But they hate applying updates (even when I do the work). They are way behind most of the time. Maybe a stable distro + a fresh FireFox would be best for them too.
I've already been informed that if I weren't doing updates windows would be applied post haste - - - something about the devil they know!!!! (Work systems are all M$ Win!)
How many other packages would I need to have fresher-than-stable?
- support for newer hardware
- compilers etc.
- more pain-points would be discovered.
================
A fundamental problem is that feature changes and bug fixes are usually mingled in upstream. In some cases, it is a false distinction. Few developers want to maintain a bunch of old releases. It is very hard for a distro to correctly separate these two, and yet that is required to maintain a stable distro.
I tend to run in debian's equivalent of 'testing'. Found over the last more than 10 years that that was a reasonable compromise to stability and currentness. HTH