- cross-posted to:
- linux@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- linux@lemmy.ml
LMDE 6 has been officially released. The big deal about this is that it’s based on the recently released Debian 12 and also that being based on Debian LMDE is 100% community based.
If you’ve been disappointed by what the Linux corporations have been doing lately or don’t like the all-snap future that Ubuntu has opened, then this is the distro for you.
I’m running it as my daily driver and it works exactly like the regular Mint so you don’t lose anything. Clem and team have done a great job, even newbies could use Debian now.
Personally I think LMDE is the future of Linux as Ubuntu goes it’s own way, and this is a good thing for Mint and the Linux community. Let’s get back to community distros and move away from the corps.
EDIT: LMDE is 64bit only. There is no 32bit option.
You must log in or register to comment.
I’ve never had a use for Linux Mint myself, but I’m still happy to see them cut out the middle man and base it directly off of Debian. Hopefully being closer to the source will result in even more upstream contributions.
Oh, no. They consider Ubuntu the best APT base out there, and even after some trouble with Canonical, they insist on basing Mint on Ubuntu. This is a plan B, it came precisely after the differences between Mint and Ubuntu were public, but I can’t find any source of that episode between Canonical and Clemente Lefebvre.
EDIT: Found one.
Big thing about being based on Ubuntu is that the community support is the biggest. Any issue you find, you can google, and there’s a 99% chance there’ll be an answer for Ubuntu which can be applied as-is to Mint.
True, but it’s not like Ubuntu is this unique distribution with very peculiar software. Most of the time, no matter which distro I use, the best reference to solve any problem is the Arch wiki.
Ah, my bad. I thought LM was going all in on Debian. Well, I’m glad they’re at least providing the option then.
Been using mint for a while on my main machine and I’m not keen on doing a reinstall, but the next time I do I’ll definitely be looking at Debian edition.
If you don’t have Nvidia gpu, then LMDE is better. It is slightly snappier and boots slightly faster.
Oh dang. It sucks to hear that my 10 year old GPU is still poorly supported.
Well, the thing is I don’t have Nvidia gpu but it is a general rule since LMDE doesn’t ship with the driver manager as the “regular” Mint does.
That’s because it doesn’t need to use the Ubuntu drivers. I’m pretty sure it’s intentional (if a bit less user friendly). I wish distros could come up with a universal(ish) driver app.
Why would anyone support an end of life gpu lmfao
LMDE has proprietary driver repos afaik.
Yes, for NoVideo.
Oh boy, here I go distro-hopping again.
Just kidding - you can pry Slackware from my cold, dead hands.Why do you use slackware?
It’s more stable than Debian and more simple in design than Arch.
It basically doesn’t do anything, except run your hardware and software, and that’s all an OS should do.More stable than debian sounds terrifying
And pretty hard to achieve, considering breaking Debian is borderline an endeavour.
I use “stable” not in the sense of “doesn’t break”, but in the sense of “doesn’t change its behaviour”.
Debian is rock solid, but Slackware is the most stable in the sense that it still looks and works pretty much exactly like it did 10-20 years ago.
That lack of dependency management tho…
…is irrelevant due to how Slackware works.
It installs all dependencies for the entire official repo right from the start.
Because it is predictable and doesn’t suck.
Challenge accepted
Has the package manager improved? Can it automatically handle dependencies?
Slackware works differently than other distros. After a default installation, dependency tracking is pointless because you install its entire repository up front.
If you need something that isn’t in the repository, you’ve got Slackbuilds that work just like Arch’s AUR. Or you can use third party repos with their own package managers, semi-official tools with depedency checking, flatpaks or whatever else you want. The point is, how you manage your packages is your choice. The default package manager is just a helpful bash script.People wouldn’t be talking about the lack of dependency management of it didn’t cause.some problems somewhere, so where could it be? Third party stuff I guess?
“Slackware has no dependency management” is a meme as old as Debian, and basically the only thing people know about it.
Fact is, you install additional packages from Slackbuilds, and there’s a tool that resolves dependencies for that (slpkg). It’s not officially supported but well-maintained and it works. So in practice, it works the same way as Arch’s AUR (where absolutely everyone uses yay even though it is also not officially supported or recommended).So, the fact that the default package manager doesn’t resolve dependencies is irrelevant in practice. What is relevant, and an actual valid criticism of Slackware, is that the default installation isn’t minimal or tailored to you, and should’t be changed unless you absolutely know what you’re doing. It gives you a wide variety of software for all kinds of tasks that wasn’t chosen by you, but by benevolent dictator Patrick Volkerding. And his choices are very different from what’s become the de facto Linux standard today (e.g. Calligra instead of LibreOffice).
My take on it is that Slackware is the perfect OS for maybe 100,000 people on earth, and I happen to be one of them.
Can anyone tell me if the Debian Testing branch has been stable? I like Debian, and I like rolling release to be more up to date, so I was considering swapping from Fedora.
Either use Stable or Unstable. Testing is actually the most unstable of the three branches, due to how Debian works:
Updated packages are first introduced into Experimental, then into Unstable when they actually build and run. So Unstable is equivalent to Arch’s main branch.
Then they automatically enter Testing after a few weeks without anyone reporting a critical bug.What this means: Testing is the only branch where the decision over what enters isn’t made by a human.
If someone notices critical bugs in Testing, the packages may be kicked out of Testing again until the bugs are fixed. So Testing is the only branch where packages can simply disappear when you run an update.
It’s also the most insecure branch: When a vulnerability is discovered, the packages in Stable are patched to close it. The packages in Unstable are updated to a new version that closes it. In Testing, the vulnerability stays until the new version eventually migrates down the line again after spending a while in Unstable.
I’ve run Unstable for years. IMO it’s a great rolling release distro with horrible branding.
Thanks for the info! I know what you mean that unstable is similar to Arch, but I know Arch has like a 3 day period or something like that before it hits the default “stable” repo. Is Unstable similar to that, or do they just raw dog it?
I’ve only been running Debian testing for a few weeks (hopped from Ubuntu dev), but I believe testing also has a 2 to 10 day period before pulling packages from unstable. Like after 10 days in unstable with no issues it automatically gets moved into testing, with more important updates getting a human moving it earlier.
Sid is not a rolling release distro, it’s an unstable distro. If you want a rolling release distro, you want something like Arch Linux, OpenSUSE Tumbleweed or OpenMandriva RR.
Unless you know how to deal with problems, go ahead and install Sid. It shouldn’t be a problem if you already know Linux and Debian specifics.
That’s just semantics in my opinion. Debian Sid isn’t meant to be a rolling release distro, but it works perfectly fine as one.
You have to take the same care as with other rolling release distros - actually read the changelogs, don’t automate updates, and type “No” if it wants to remove packages you need. Other than that, I’ve never had any issues, and never heard from anyone whose Sid brakes regularly.Debian does not agree. They even warn you about packages with unfulfilled dependencies. In my experience, OpenSUSE Tumbleweed does feel like a finished, polished rolling release distro. Sid breaks sometimes, it’s okay for it to get broken. I don’t know your use case but it did for me, especially with some obscure libraries or with very specific versions of scientific ones. It’s not semantics only, Sid is fundamentally designed as an unstable distribution, not as a rolling release one.
But I insist, if it works for you as a rolling release distro, it’s great. I just feel the obligation to warn the others what’s the intention behind Sid.
I use debian 12 unstable and it has been great. No issues so far.
I ran 12 (testing) for the last year and the only issue I had was related to unsupported hardware with a newer laptop.
Very excited to see this. After having been through the last few Ubuntu versions, they have made some very frustrating decisions that have made the system management side a real pain.
So I’m showi my my extreme age but I remember when Mint was born as a sort of windows-like Ubuntu for easy migration. Has it carved out a reason for existing for folks that don’t want a windows like experience?
Their interface is familiar to Windows users but so is KDE and many things that aren’t GNOME. Primarily it is the flagship distro for Cinnamon, they put a lot of work into making the user experience seamless and their implementation of Cinnamon especially is much better than other distros that ship it as an option. They also co-founded MATE when GNOME 3 came out and have supported that forever.
Main thing for me is extremely sane defaults, just enough automation to simplify some things without it getting in the way, just enough customization without it being overwhelming or an eyesore (I hate KDE context menus). It’s been very good for getting out of the way so I can focus, I appreciate that it doesn’t have a ton of flying, shiny objects all over the place but still looks good, and I don’t have to add a ton of extensions to get it the way I like.
This. Mint is the only distro I’ve found where I’ve truly never needed the CLI if I didn’t feel like using it.
It’s just a generally solid, stable, and easy to use distro. I use EndeavourOS nowadays, but when I was first getting started Mint was what I always returned to after spats of distro hopping. As far as it’s primary DE, Cinnamon, it’s less “windows like” and more “not gnome like”. Every DE that isn’t gnome could be called “windows like” in my experience.
More like Cinnamon being GNOME 2.5
Since GNOME 3 changed everything for better or worse.
Mostly worse.
I just installed it in a VM to check it out, as I’m not a Cinnamon guy usually, and I really like it! I need to try it out on metal and see how it handles games, but so far I’m really happy.
Would this be analogous to Endeavor OS for Arch?
Yes. The Mint team have done all the work that you normally would have to with Debian, to give you a nice stable, fast and full featured desktop system.
Plus they keep Cinnamon up to date over the years. Even though the Debian base will remain the same (apart from any security patches/important updates) you’ll always have the latest Cinnamon desktop and utilities from Mint like Timeshift, Warpinator etc
Btw Warpinator works like Airdrop. Install the app on your Android, pair to LMDE and you can easily send and receive files and photos between phone and desktop.
How does warpinator compare to kde connect?
KDE Connect is more full featured. It can also show phone notifications on Linux, copy clipboard, screen mirror your android to Linux.
Warpinator is literally just to transfer files wirelessly.
deleted by creator
I would say Mint adds more to Debian than EndeavourOS adds to Arch.
For one thing, Mint has its own DE ( Cinnamon ). You can install this on other distros but it was made for Mint and it is the DE experience out-of-the-box on LMDE.
and also that being based on Debian LMDE is 100% community based.
At first I read it as “completely based” and wondered whether LMDE is also red pilled.
When I heard LMDE was goated, I wondered if it was with or without the sauce.
I wonder if they’ll ever ditch Ubuntu and release a version based on Debian Sid.
Not Sid, but that’s exactly that Mint LMDE is. Rather than being built on top of Ubuntu, it’s built on top of Debian
Still no Wayland, right?
Sadly, no :(
Why is this important?
Security and Wayland compositors run better for me. YMMV, of course.
Mint/Cinnamon will probably be the last adopters of Wayland but surely at this point they should be starting to test it?
deleted by creator
I’m excited to give it a try.
Well, time to try it. Hopefully XFCE runs well; Cinnamon is not to my liking at all.
so what would be the difference between LMDE and Debian with cinnamon DE
- Desktop Theming: LMDE is gonna look like Mint out of the box, while Debian is gonna look like this
- Mint Software repositories and Mint’s System tools, like Mint Install or Mint Update, on LMDE
- LMDE is installed with Calamares, which is a little more user friendly than Debian’s installer
If you’re an advanced user there’s no big difference overall, but for a new user LMDE is gonna be a little easier to approach
Literally the only difference is that regular Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu and LMDE is based on Debian.
So LM will use the Ubuntu repo and any additions to the code Ubuntu made, whereas LMDE will use the Debian repos and their code.
At the moment LMDE actually has a newer kernel (6) than LM (5) and newer apps, but that will change with the next version of Linux Mint when it should catch up.
And finally, LMDE is also available in 32bit as well as 64bit, whereas LM is 64bit only.
Did not answer the question.
They’re pretty much the same to novice users, only differing in packages versions (including the kernel, as OP mentioned).
I am guessing this is kinda the point, to make it as similar as possible, since Linux Mint team is looking to replace its main base to Debian from Ubuntu.
This is 👍 👌 👍
