News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Curl to shell isn't so bad by TeMPOraL on Saturday November 09, 2019 @10:42AM (#21492130)
If Ubuntu is the not stale alternative to Debian (stable), then I can't imagine how bad the situation is there. I often build software myself because Ubuntu is very often stale.
Re:Curl to shell isn't so bad by bbanyc on Saturday November 09, 2019 @12:03PM (#21492659)
Ubuntu LTS (freezes every two years) or "regular" Ubuntu (freezes every six months)?

I'm wondering if the periodic freeze-the-universe model that many distros use reflects a world that doesn't really exist anymore where distros came on DVDs (or CDs, or floppies). Whatever version you had on the disc, that's the version you're going to use.

I just started playing with FreeBSD in a VM, which has a frozen base system and constantly-updated packages separate from it. This works better for software you don't think of as an "OS component" but the question then becomes where you draw the line.

Or maybe it's just a fundamental disconnect between consumer-facing "move fast and break things" and enterprise-level "never break anything even if it means you can't move at all" and there's no way to make software that works for both.

Re:Curl to shell isn't so bad by farisjarrah on Saturday November 09, 2019 @01:21PM (#21493195)
This isn’t how Ubuntu even works. Ubuntu doesn’t just “freeze” their operating system every two years. They are constantly delivering package, security, and hardware enablement fixes. Often the stuff that lands in Ubuntu non-lts versions end up in the lts point releases. They keep a stable base of x.x versions but they definitely backport bug fixes to x.x.x versions of their software packages. For example there was a bug in sudo like 3 weeks ago, and Ubuntu immediately issued a fix within hours of the upstream project’s fix.
Re:Curl to shell isn't so bad by kingosticks on Saturday November 09, 2019 @06:37PM (#21495298)
They back-port "high-impact" bugs such as security issues (your example), severe regressions and bugs causing loss of user data. They do not back-port other bug fixes or new features. The result is that you often find the version included in your Ubuntu release is stale. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#When
Re:Curl to shell isn't so bad by bbanyc on Saturday November 09, 2019 @02:15PM (#21493613)
Maybe "version freeze" or "feature freeze" is a better term. The sudo bug was fixed in version 1.8.28, but Ubuntu LTS didn't upgrade to the new version. They're still on 1.8.21p2 from 2017, but with the bugfix and other Debian and Ubuntu patches applied, resulting in a bizarre package version of "1.8.21p2-3ubuntu1.1".

Which with something relatively small and stable like sudo, is one thing. For big projects on rapid release cycles, like GNOME, it's got a much bigger impact.

Though I do see that Ubuntu does keep updating Firefox and Chromium to the latest versions in LTS, because they're so big and change so fast that backporting fixes has become practically impossible. That looks like a very rare exception to the rule; your typical Python library won't be getting that treatment.

Re:Curl to shell isn't so bad by mirimir on Saturday November 09, 2019 @11:19AM (#21492351)
I've always preferred to use Debian stable just because it's stable. And because it's arguably got the latest security updates.

But for Tor, I always use the Tor Project repository. Or for Docker.

And then there's stuff that won't even build in Debian, because it's been developed specifically for Ubuntu.

Re:Curl to shell isn't so bad by PopeDotNinja on Saturday November 09, 2019 @02:31PM (#21493723)
My former boss had us use Debian stable in production for this reason. He did not like apt-get related surprises.
Re:Curl to shell isn't so bad by goatinaboat on Saturday November 09, 2019 @03:14PM (#21494021)
If you need a continuously updated Debian then Kali may fit the bill - it’s not just for security work.