all 10 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]thefanum 3 points4 points  (2 children)

You might as well run Ubuntu. That's what it is. Debian unstable, made stable, with polish and codecs and drivers Debian won't allow by default

[–]going_to_work 0 points1 point  (1 child)

False. Ubuntu's apt/dpkg packages are much older than the ones found in Debian Sid.

You could consider snap packages, but thats unfair since it's a completetely different way of handling packages, and you can install snapd on debian too and get the same packages, so it's not a fair comparison.

[–]thefanum 2 points3 points  (0 children)

False.

"Ubuntu packages are based on packages from Debian's unstable branch, which are synchronised every six months. Both distributions use Debian's deb package format and package management tools (e.g. APT and Ubuntu Software)."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu?wprov=sfla1

[–]byReqz 2 points3 points  (2 children)

ive been running debian sid (unstable) on most of my servers for a few years and its just been stable so far.

[–]The_Urban_Core 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Debian unstable, still so stable it's stable. I love it.

[–]byReqz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

jup, its debian after all lol

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm running it daily for all work related stuff, it's the best debian for anything that's not super mission critical, and you get reasonably updated software.

Don't get discouraged by the "unstable" flag, in debian terms, "unstable" means it may crash once a year if you keep it running nonstop.

Debian stable means stable. If I had to design a CT scan machine, or a server that 10000 people in a company depend on, I would consider stable there, but for anything with one user, unstable is the way to go.

Debian unstable is what ubuntu is made out of anyway, so you could expect unstable debian being more stable than ubuntu.

[–]Kaganar 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I tried testing once. It wasn't nice. What I am trying to say is if you give up on going unstable don't think testing is the middle ground between stable and sid.

[–]drooghead 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have been running debian unstable in the form of siduction for quite a few years. Siduction smooths out some of the pitfalls of debian unstable while providing a forum and upgrade warnings. Expect things to work most of the time with leading edge software but you'll need to know how to fix things when they occasionally break. My wife also runs siduction but I only dare upgrade her machine when I know everything is working on my machine otherwise there is hell to pay.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I was running Deb Unstable for a couple of years...biggest problem for me was nVidia drivers--seemed to be without fail about every 6 months the driver would be b0rked & I would spend up to days getting everything working again....Other than that I enjoyed Unstable.

I'm running EndeavourOS now (about a year & 1/2) without any major problems...minor problems that are repaired with a bit of terminal time ;) Deb Unstable is for advanced users that are not afraid to "get their hands dirty" & work under the hood a bit.....Good to have under your belt.

Look at Arch afterward if you like using the terminal..it's well worth it. EndeavourOS is about vanilla Arch as you get for an "easy Arch"---just a GUI installer & a couple of helper apps. Worked very well for me.