Vanilla OS 2.0 Shifting from Ubuntu Base to Debian Sid
phoronix.com
phoronix.com
Debian Sid is the main initial entry point for new packages and so a rolling release which only pauses for a bit once every two years during the freeze for the stable releases.
Compared to Arch Linux it has a few advantages, like e.g., it actually cares about recording exact and sane versioned break/depends/conflicts so upgrading a system after year(s) will work out just fine without getting ones hand dirty. Further they track and install the kernel under a correctly ABI versioned path, so you can pull an upgrade with a new kernel and then still load a module from the currently booted kernel just fine, no reboot required, same for libraries. I mean I like Arch Linux, don't get me wrong it's my second favorite distro for sure, but having to immediately reboot after most updates as otherwise half the programs or kernel functionality is unavailable is a bit of a nuisance.
I used to use debian stable, then testing, then sid, then migrated to Arch and Arch has been definitely more stable than testing and sid. I never had big issues with Arch but Debian more than a few time gave me updates that entirely broke my system to the point of not booting anymore and not being able to fix it with a recovery USB
Ha, I have the exact opposite experience - one can get (un)lucky on any OS it seems..
People say this a lot but I disagree. Debian Sid is not a rolling release.
Debian is a project that produces releases of Debian GNU/Linux. Those releases are then supported for many years. As a development tool for the production of those stable releases, Debian also has 'testing', 'unstable', and 'experimental'.
The key difference is that Sid is not a product for Debian. Debian makes no claim to support Sid. Occasionally it breaks, and that's just part of using it, too bad.
In contrast, for a true rolling release distribution like Arch, the rolling release is the product. It's not just a tool the distribution uses for the production of something else - indeed, Arch has no stable releases.
I don't say this as a criticism of Debian - to the contrary, I have used both distributions quite a bit. I just think it's a mistake to tell people Sid is rolling release. If you want a rolling release distribution, use Arch. Use Sid if you're a Debian developer and need to...otherwise I honestly can't find much of a reason to use Sid. When I'm on Debian and need to get newer packages, there are other ways to do this that don't involve turning your whole system over to the churn of constant package updates (e.g. backports.)
> there are other ways to do this that don't involve turning your whole system over to the churn of constant package updates
I mean, that's no different than Arch or any other rolling release distribution.
I hope the people from Vanilla OS do some QA before pushing packages.
Debian is a great OS and still runs on some of my servers! However, what about the release/EOL cycle, which might affect some people's reasoning? Along the lines of: "I'll set this up and I want to keep it running reasonably for X years with unattended-upgrades."
Debian releases are supported for just a few years: https://endoflife.software/operating-systems/linux/debian
In contrast, Ubuntu LTS releases are around for about 5 years or longer (HWE): https://endoflife.software/operating-systems/linux/ubuntu
Technically you do have Debian LTS, but it's never mentioned anywhere as prominently like Ubuntu LTS is, which feels a tad odd (because it works fine): https://www.debian.org/lts/
Of course, many looked in the direction of something like CentOS for this, or RHEL, or Rocky Linux or Alma Linux etc., which are supported for around 10 years usually. In my experience, DEB distros play more nicely with most of the software that I want to personally run, though.
Eventually I persuaded them to let me use CentOS 6. What they didn't know is they ended up running Debian stable for the next 7 years thanks to a pact with the other sysadmins. Eventually it all went to AWS and Amazon Linux which is basically a uniquely fucked up version of CentOS.
Really I'd rather run FreeBSD but no one wants to pay me to do that.
Also I want to use Linux to solve problems, not create problems that need solving :)
What do you means with pure?
As a professional, it's really simple (as in "not complex", not as in "easy to start using") and once you've understood your setup, troubleshooting becomes much easier if you have to do it.
Pros:
- Probably the only Ubuntu based distro with vanilla Gnome.
- Distrobox OOB, can use any package manager.
Cons:
- No Nvidia drivers, my laptop failed to even boot the installer.
- Installing additional drivers is nothing but pain.
- Too vanilla for my taste, requires a lot of configuration to get to usable state (that other distros provide out of the box).
- Sandboxed apps provide more trouble than not.
- apx is slow, I'd rather stick to apt.
I then tried Manjaro Gnome which was a much, much better experience, everything just worked. Manjaro gets a lot of bad rep (I've been on the hate train too) but at least their defaults are sensible.
I tried VanillaOS only because of the Ubuntu base, because Ubuntu guarantees a stable system at the very least. I don't think I'd be able to recommend it to anyone though, the distro is very well-made, but I just can't find a justification for it.
I hear a lot that the work that Canonical puts into making Ubuntu a reliable, high quality desktop distro would be hard to replicate if distro builders were to move upstream, but I wonder if this is still as true in 2023.
The world has enough Ubuntu-based distros at this point, I think, and many of them just feel like re-skins that don't do enough to differentiate themselves.
Also, being based on Ubuntu means you are really trapped in their twice year release cycle, whereas building off of sid you could potentially do more frequent releases. I'm not personally a huge fan of rolling releases, but would love a distro that releases semi-frequently (2-3 months vs 6).
The resolution to to this is that one should subscribe to IRC or some of the Debian mailing lists. There the developers publish the fact that major changes are hitting Unstable.
If one stays away from Sid during those times, and perform an update once things have settled, a 'more stable' Unstable is realized.
I don't use Unstable, but I do run Testing (currently AKA BookWorm), and I act in a similar manner. There are breaking changes sometimes. I perform no updates at those times. In addition, I have to check packages.debian.org sometimes as specific packages might be broken, and it will indicate what/when change may occur.
I like it, but it's not a huge improvement for me over Ubuntu.
I may go back to my debian roots after reading some comments in this thread.
Zorin is one of the few distros that boots on my laptop. The rest like Ubuntu aren't even able to reach the installer because they don't have Nvidia drivers. They just reboot.
I haven't had any Nvidia issues ever on Zorin, it's pretty much perfect out of the box. The wine additions, flatpak integration, snap as a choice and not force, the super polished and modern UI, the stability and the focus on the user instead of enterprise is why I stick to Zorin.
I see no reason to use Ubuntu anymore, Zorin is just that but better.
Ryzen 5 5600H and Nvidia RTX 3050
what does that mean? I checked their home page and FAQ as well, where they repeat it but also don't explain it. It makes me think of it installing itself on your hard drive, and then immediately marking it read-only, never to be changed again
> ..but also not.
> Vanilla OS is an immutable operating system, core parts of the system are locked down to prevent unwanted changes and corruption from third-party applications or a faulty update. Some paths are still writable, such as the home and configurations directories, this allows the user to keep their files and ensure the normal functioning of applications.
> Core components are only updated via controlled and atomic transactions, which are applied only on success and made available on reboot.
> Need to install a component in the core system? No problem, you can open a transactional shell at any time, make your changes and let the system apply them automatically!
And only the main system is going to be using SID.