169
submitted 9 months ago by nifty@lemmy.world to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world

What’s Debian based on again? I think it was some earlier variant of Ubuntu

/s

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] TimeSquirrel@kbin.social 12 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Yep, Debian was (is) a disaster to configure graphics with modern hardware.

Hasn't been the case for years. Perhaps even a decade, from what I recall. Just check the "nonfree" option in the installer, and you'll get all the drivers you need. It's not any harder to set up than Ubuntu these days.

[-] TheInsane42@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Ubuntu has been around for 2 decades (close nough, octobet it's 2 decades) and yes, Debian is 11 year older and now known for it's desktop friendly use. That Debian caught up in the last decade is about time, but to late for the major population who want linux but not the hassle of manually configure the graphics environment.

To be honest, I see that most people of 30 and younger don't know or care how a computer (or anything) works, it just works.

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 9 months ago

Then they don't need to use Debian. There are plenty of user friendly options. Debians installer is kind of bad but that doesn't mean Debian is bad.

[-] TheInsane42@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

What is bad about it? It's as fool proof as the RedHat installer, unless you go to the expert text mode one. (And even that is pretty straight forward)

[-] mariusafa 1 points 9 months ago

Why debian installer is bad? Literaly press okay to almost everything and you got installed

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 9 months ago

You can't disable root and tasksel may be confusing to some.

[-] TheInsane42@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Why would you want to disable root?

Remote root login is disabled by default, local root disabeling is useless anyway, as when you have acdess to the physical system you can break it open anyway.

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 9 months ago

Because sudo exists and is way better for so many reasons.

[-] TheInsane42@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

It's a better way, but not fool proof. I always keep root available for console login. (Saves booting from external media when there is an issue) For the rest, sudo is perfect though, but it doesn't replace root login in 100% of the situations.

this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2024
169 points (92.9% liked)

linuxmemes

21169 readers
1954 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.

  • Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS