It’s more that changes can be made with coordination across the OS, with a shared vision and goal. Linux distros are primarily integration projects, putting together the components from other peoples projects. BSDs are in control of the base OS project as one coherent project.

I see what you mean now. I thought you meant as in upstream/downstream.

Tumbleweed is not a derivative of Leap.

This can actually be harder than it looks, you have to get the angles right for the eyeballs to really touch. At least that’s how it was when I tried it.

“The discussion continued for quite a while without making much headway.”

I think Debian is interesting, being such a large project of collaboration. I want this democratic, volunteer, non-corporate backed, free project to show that 10000 eyes make bugs shallow. I wish this model produced new ways of doing things, bringing people together in the spirit of creativity and playful productivity.
I’ve used Debian in different ways for around 15 years now, and I really want it to succeed.
Having said that, there is a “but…” looming in the back of my mind. But… it’s difficult to ignore that other distributions are the ones pushing Linux forward. The innovation from Fedora and the distributions still called OpenSuse explore new areas which become the standards.
This is not criticism of Debian, I just wonder if we humans are capable of collaborating freely at that level without some top-down force directing work forward, or if we are bound to being one step behind, always trying to catch up to what others have already done?

One project goal of OpenBSD is: “We strive to make our software robust and secure, and encourage companies to use whichever pieces they want to.”
They are not being taken advantage of, this is a desired outcome.

Are we actually converting people or is the desktop platform just less popular for other OSs in favor of phones etc?

Debian + Flatpaks has been very reliable to me.

The Dijkstra way.

I agree. Maybe this is because Debian tries to be everything, the universal OS, server or desktop or whatever, while for example Fedora Workstation can be preconfigured as a workstation. Back in the day around 2008 this is what Ubuntu was to me, a Debian Workstation. Now it’s different, they’ve diverged so much. Maybe Spiral Linux could be a preconfigured Debian Workstation now.

I’ve had a similar experience. About the old packages with bugs, I think that can work both ways. The newer packages might have bug fixes, but also new features with different bugs. Sometimes it feels like the number of bugs is constant, you just have to choose between old known bugs or new unknown bugs.

I also use Debian and Fedora on different computers so I’m curious, how do they compare in your opinion? Any interesting differences or reasons to use one instead of the other?

It’s as beautiful as I remembered it! :)

I remember that site! They also had a song called Selleck, Waterfall, Sandwich.

fORBidden memes

The last time my grub was broken was around 2012 when I ran Arch. After that I have rarely thought about grub at all.

Could you give us your opinions on what you would change about bash if you could go back in time and just decide how it was?

It’s not really a proper guide, like, it doesn’t make sense anatomically. Upper and lower “sixpack” muscles aren’t different muscles, the squareness of them is just fascia on top holding things together. I don’t know what definition of “core” they have here, it also makes no sense. If you want to exercise, good, but find a better guide.

https://wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian#Don.27t_make_a_FrankenDebian

What about the proposal to just drop the name openSUSE with no replacement? And let each distro just be called Tumbleweed, Leap, Aeon, etc.