Why are its packages so out of date? For example, the nginx package is from January 2017, over two years ago

Why are its packages so out of date? For example, the nginx package is from January 2017, over two years ago.

Attached: debian.png (300x395, 25K)

Other urls found in this thread:

debian.org/releases/
packages.debian.org/search?keywords=nginx&searchon=names&suite=all§ion=all
discord.
warosu.org/g/thread/70412981
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Because "stability" means nothing changes, which is nice if you need something to just werk without intervention every time to the system updates

too much neon hair dye

It is like you didn't bother reading the manual. Weird.
debian.org/releases/
Perhaps you can figure out for yourself what it means to have "stable," "unstable," and "testing" versions.

Then why does ubuntu just werk better than debian does

it doesn't, where'd you get that idea?

Their entire proposition as a distro is "linux done easy." All their time is spent making sure that things will work almost perfectly out of the box.

I use debian and ubuntu every day. If you believe this user is wrong, I think you probably haven't tried comparing them side by side with similar hardware.

An additional remark: "done easy" does not necessarily mean "done well." I would not claim ubuntu is going always be the best distro for any user.

Except the stable version of nginx, 1.14.2, is not available in the stable repositories of debian. It's an outdated, legacy version.

because there's only 2 stoners still working on it

"stable" in debian means "we have tested our packages against one another in hopes of no version conflicts." It does not mean "we trust every individual developer to have done this right." The latter interpretation is what more quickly updating distros do. (I think Mint is an example?)

Just admit it, stable means outdated.

I'm not quite sure what you trying to get out this, but I wasn't saying the software isn't old. It is, and that makes debian hard to manage especially if you want to add additional packages which aren't in the debian repositories. Debian works great if you don't plan to add any repos.

No one is pretending that debian has recent software versions, and that's not why people might use debian. If that's what you want, just use a different distro. We have a ton of choice in the linux community, no reason to crap on what other people like.

This. Plus these days running debian is much easier because you don't have to compile a million things to get newer software. Appimages, flatpaks, you name it.(snaps suck dick though).

If you want up to date applications on a stable distro, you should use containers.

the latest stable version according to nginx, it's the 1.14.2
buster has 1.14.2 backported
stretch has 1.14.2
sid has 1.14.2
all those are from december 2018, 4 months ago.
Where did you see packages from Jan 2017, faggot?
What would you ship in your distro? the version the creators call as stable, or the one that gets a shitload of changes because it's the current under development branch?
This is not your virginpad with the riced i3 pulled from github every morning in your basement.
packages.debian.org/search?keywords=nginx&searchon=names&suite=all§ion=all
you are to dumb for debian, go back to ubuntu.

just get testing or sid, faggot

seething trannies.
Backports has like 100 packages for server shit that almost no one cares to have upgraded for features. It's just shameful to even mention backports to defend this, not even mentioning backports are sometimes EOL in upstream packages.
Testing is always broken and takes at least 7 days to get a fix from unstable, most of the time more since unstable changes fast and the fix may already be in another version that is not going to go into testing yet. So the only option it's unstable (HAHAHAHHAHAHA).
Just accept Debian is underpowered, like 2 actual developers and 20 trannies run debian now. Most or all packages are EOL in stable, so they backport with the force of a hundred trannies (not much) to get security upgrades 3 months after the CVE is released. Or prepare testing for 3 years to ship with a shit ton of bugs that are already fixed outside of Debianland.
It's a joke compared to what debian used to be.

>when you thought someone wanted to talk about linux distros but they actually just wanted to scream about how much they hate trannies
Why did I bother replying?

you're the cancer of this board, user

Jow Forums (((d*scord)))
Come join frens
discord.
gg/Ypp68MZ

Attached: 1542747726200.jpg (567x800, 389K)

>wants to talk about lonix
>only mentions unrelated pol shit
cope, do debianfags have nothing to say about this? that's sad

Remember that time Debian fucked up SSL, because they have to put their own shitstink on everything, and then never change it? Remember all the flaws unique to IceCat that caused insecurity, that took forever to resolve because it's so "stable"?

My favorite thing about Debian stable is that the massive security flaws that Debian tards create in their pursuit of reinventing the wheel are just as stable as the "fixes".

>Remember
>bringing up shit from over a decade ago
>already thoroughly disputed
>massive security flaws
>lists 2

curious why hasn't their still not been a supposedly better release engineering solution for operating systems?

do you use stable or testing?

run a server and get back to me
i want security updates and nothing else. you make me have to reconfigure everything every time i update then i'm not interested in your distro

There's different solutions in practice by meme distros. The one that will probably hit mainstream is OSTree + containers.

well yeah it's not because debian are "tards" as user says. release engineering is not a sexy problem to solve and all the money is in other things. people take debian for granted.

I agree and I am glad Red Hat is working on it now. Canonical pretty much gave up on their solution. I already use OSTree + Flatpak in my workstation via Fedora SilverBlue and it's very usable. Here's my thread from earlier today. It's too bad no one was interested.
warosu.org/g/thread/70412981

>no security updates in testing
this is not even a meme it is said in the name, testing doesn't have timely security upgrades; and debian saying this is serious shit since backporting to stable takes always some weeks compared to upstream or the day of CVE announcement. You are encouraged to use the even more broken debian sid.
No one should use anything else than Stable unless you are actually testing and reporting bugs to Debian, you are doing it for FREE.
If you need newer packages without security delays and breakages use Fedora

this.
Backports has like 10 packages for server shit that almost no one cares to have upgraded for features. It's just shameful to even mention backports to defend this, not even mentioning backports are sometimes EOL in upstream packages.
Testing is always broken and takes at least 7 days to get a fix from unstable, most of the time more since unstable changes fast and the fix may already be in another version that is not going to go into testing yet. So the only option it's unstable (HAHAHAHHAHAHA).
Just accept Debian is underpowered, like 2 actual developers and 20 trannies run debian now. Most or all packages are EOL in stable, so they backport with the force of a hundred trannies to get security upgrades 3 months after the CVE is released. Or prepare testing for 3 years to ship with a shit ton of bugs that are already fixed outside of Debianland.
It's a joke compared to what debian used to be.

Do you main fedora now?

What distro do you use now?

This. I use debian because I don't give a fuck if my software is new, I care that my system is reliable and all my machines behave consistently.

yes, fedora since it tracks stable branches of upstream but has the option to only upgrade security or bugfixes. Though dnf is slower than apt.
It even works well for servers,
sudo dnf upgrade --security
detects packages which fix CVEs in your system and installs them, afterwards run sudo dnf needs-restarting and you know if an old version is running, so that way you manually restart the program or reboot the system. So it's pretty stable while being up to date. 6 months of wait for major changes in the desktop is way smaller than debian's 3 years, and 13 months of support for servers is not that small.

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-04-03 22-51-21.png (1600x900, 1021K)

and I mean, I like new software but there's times I just want to stay the same or I don't want to reboot; and if there are security problems with the packages you can opt out of other types of upgrades. whereas if you were in arch, you don't have other option since partial upgrades are unsupported. Dnf tracks very well dependencies, there's no need to run full upgrades everytime you want something specific.

Attached: 1553613435371.png (1280x720, 1.23M)

very interesting. Doesn't Linus Torvalds himself use fedora?