• Maestro@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I never understood why people run Ubuntu on servers. It’s madness. Ubuntu is a fork of unstable Debian packages. You don’t want unstable on your server!

    Ubuntu on Desktop I can understand. Back in the days the Debian release was really long so much software was a tad outdated after a couple of years. But Debian had a much faster release cycle now, and had pretty much incorporated all the good stuff from Ubuntu and left the bad behind.

    • nous@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Ubuntu is a fork of unstable Debian packages. You don’t want unstable on your server!

      Unstable does not mean crashes all the time. What makes them unstable on Debian is they can change and break API completely. But guess what, Ubuntu freezes the versions for their release and maintains their own security patches, completely mitigating that issue.

      There are other reasons you might not want to use Ubuntu on a server but package version stability is not one of them.

    • fubo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Ubuntu on Desktop I can understand.

      Not anymore. A whole extra, unneeded, proprietary, locked-in package system. Ads in the default install.

      There’s Mint, Pop!, and plenty of other options that actually respect the user.

    • LeFantome@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      We should be clear on our terminology here. Debian Unstable is called that because the package “versions” are not stable ( change ). It is not really a comment on quality although more frequent change also implies more opportunities for issues to be introduced. In Unstable, Debian may introduce disruptive changes either to configuration or even to the package library itself.

      Regardless, taking a snapshot of Debian unstable and then separately supporting those packages completely eliminates these issues. That is what Ubuntu does.

      Ubuntu LTS now offers up to 10 years of support without having to upgrade a release. This is far more “stable” than anything in Debian, including of course “Debian Stsble”. In fact, it exceeds the stability of Red Hat Enterprise.

      I have not used Ubuntu in many years but I have been considering using it again for some server use cases precisely because it is now so “stable”. I still do not like Ubuntu on the desktop and do not like snaps in particular. I do not think snaps impact any of the server packages I would use though and I do not expect Canonical to introduce them during the support lifetime of a particular release.

      For personal use, the 10 years of support is entirely free. That is pretty compelling.