Going to install Debian later tonight on a laptop what should I go with, stable or unstable, testing.
Looking for some insight from current Debian users.
I'm currently running arch but ain't no body got time for all the daily updates, how frequently does the testing/unstable branches get updated compared to arch.
>>51844690
stable is, well, stable. rock solid on servers, but don't expect bleeding edge anything by default. serious issues are almost unheard of on stable.
testing should work fine for a desktop if you can live with minor issues from time to time. i've used it before.
never tried unstable.
>>51844690
You should go with stable + backports or unstable. I can't really see the what a reasonable usecase is for testing, when it gets security updates and patches more slowly than unstable when something breaks. If you use arch you will probably find even unstable significantly more stable.
>>51844690
>Using linux on your personal computer
>>51845651
0/10
fuck off
>>51845651
>>51847012
>>51844690
If you have used Arch you're already in the "scene", so the Issues of Debian should mean no trouble for you (as someone already said it's rock solid, so no issues in the OS itself, but expect issues when trying to install/use certain software)
Go for testing, is the one with less software compatibility issues.
>>51847293
thanks, that was my first choice.
another questuion, is there anything similar to aur for debian to install packages not found in the default repos, what is the usual route to be taken in such cases other than ppas
>>51844690
unstable/erperimental get constant updates because thats where development happens
testing is where packages go after unstable/when they are considered mature enough.
stable gets security updates, + minor updates, but on major updates to prevent api/abi break.
backports ports newer packages to stable.
>>51847659
there are no ppas on debian.
theres deb-multimedia for multimedia stuff (and some other third party repos i don't care about) and you can build the packages yourself
>>51844690
jessie or stretch
never install sid it breaks everything
>>51847659
>>51847809
some ubuntu ppas work. for the popular packages, there's usually a ton of info on how to install them to be found on google.
>>51847876
really I was never able to get numix themes to work every time I add the PPA it says cant connect or something along the lines of that.
>>51844690
I'd say install testing.
Stable is still really fucking old, and you'll proabaly want some more bleeding edge stuff for you laptop.
If you're running arch already, don't even bother with unstable, because that's what arch is based on. If you aren't happy with arch, you probably won't be happy with unstable.
Go with testing, and have fun.
>>51844690
Install testing unless you want old ass software. Testing is more stable than most windows machines.
I base this on >Going to install Debian later tonight on a laptop
Had you said something like >Im going to install Debian later tonight on my NAS, and then I want it to run for 4 years without me having to ever touch it again
then you should get stable.
>>51844690
>installing debian on a laptop
have fun getting your wireless working
Just get LMDE.
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-faq/ch-choosing.en.html
>stable is old
Released from September is old?
>>51849776
>testing is less old,
go with fedora
>>51847830
> sid breaks everything
/thread
>>51844690
If youre still there OP..
I have used debian for 10 years, on desktops, laptops, and servers
Stable is for servers and has old-ish programs
Testing if for desktops where things are kinda new with few bugs
Unstable (SID) is only for a hobby, kinda like the arch may-mays where some updates f'up xorg or other critical things
tl;dr go with testing
