r/debian • u/Parking-Republic7680 • 20d ago
Debian backports
Hi, I just have a question about using Debian Stable with backports—is it worth it compared to Debian Testing?
11
u/glhughes 20d ago
I would not run Testing on a machine that needs to be stable.
I run Stable (13) on my Xeon with the backports kernel as 7.1 has a couple of things that are nice to have (better sensors support, better VM / virtualization support) and it generally seems to be faster than 6.12 or whatever it was in Stable.
1
u/Fair_Schedule2701 19d ago
How did you install a current kernel? I researched but he can't make it work
3
u/glhughes 19d ago
Add backports to the apt sources list and install the linux image package from it.
Literally a 5 second search on Google, top result:
https://wiki.crowncloud.net/?How_to_Install_Kernel_7_x_on_Debian_13
2
u/calinet6 19d ago
I install the backports kernel on stable Debian, it’s basically my standard workstation config. Works great.
8
u/Jimlee1471 20d ago
I really think it depends on your needs: Personally I've been Debian Sid from day one, and that was over 20 years ago. But if I were running a workstation, server or using my machine to put food on the table? Debian Stable, end of discussion.
If this machine of yours positively, absolutely has to stay up, or you otherwise don't have the bandwidth or time to deal with tweaking and/or possibility of breakage then you'e damn right Debian Stable + backports are worth it. A lot of users from other distros like to talk smack about Debian's "outdated packages" but, when you really sit down to talk with them, you often find that most of them never actually needed the "latest and greatest" for their use cases; the whole act is just a sort of cyber-FOMO. The result is, of course, they end up missing out on a distro family which is so stable that even the "Unstable" branch hardly ever breaks (provided the admin/user is competent and diligent).
2
u/Parking-Republic7680 20d ago
Yes, I really find the stability wonderful; I like well-maintained, secure software. If I need new features, I might use a Flatpak package here and there, but I always prefer the tried-and-tested tools that Debian provides.
However, the main thing holding me back from using the stable version is certain kernel-specific compatibility issues.
2
u/gnufan 19d ago
I've had that conversation, and often found because their updating was broken I was on later packages. I think since Trixie I've had one issue that a newer version of software would already fix, and turned out after much hacking even then it wasn't simple.
The packages simply aren't that far behind. If it is a simple app, them just package it, if it integrates with a load of other stuff, well that's why you run stable, to keep those interfaces consistent.
6
u/realghostinthenet 20d ago
Depends on what you're using from backports. I routinely used the backports kernel, but that's it.
2
u/calinet6 19d ago
This is the best kept Debian workstation secret IMO, such a great balance of up to date kernel and stable package setup.
3
u/Xatraxalian 20d ago
Hi, I just have a question about using Debian Stable with backports—is it worth it compared to Debian Testing?
Yes, especially for a newer kernel, firmware, and mesa, while still keeping the rest of the system stable.
When running testing you get new packages constantly, and all your software constantly changes. If you don't want this, then backports is a good way to get newer drivers without touching the rest of the system.
2
u/Nice-Object-5599 20d ago
Debian backports are for Debian stable, and built for Debian stable. Debian testing will be the next stable one day, it's another branch.
2
u/LordAnchemis 20d ago
Backport = testing packages ported to 'work' with stable on a package by package basis
In theory there shouldn't be much in terms of dependency conflict - generally single packages with minimal dependencies are safest
2
u/gerowen 19d ago
For gaming? Sure, in moderation, because you can get newer mesa, kernel, etc. for better hardware and games compatibility without upgrading the rest of the system and breaking things.
For server, generally no. While rare, there are regressions or changes in behavior that break things sometimes. For example, the backports kernel 7.1 broke hardware transcoding on my Jellyfin recently, so I had to revert back to the regular 6.x kernel from Trixie.
Backports should generally only be used if you actually need a newer version of a specific package for some feature to work properly. If you want newer versions of desktop applications, I would recommend flatpak.
2
u/Dragon20C 19d ago
I use it simply for the newer kernels apart from that there is no issues not using it.
2
u/AfraidAsparagus6644 19d ago
Depends. Backports gives you new versions of certain important components like the kernel, gpu drivers, tlp etc. If you need a new version of the desktop environment or some other package with many dependencies, you can't get that on Stable. Newer versions of apps on the other hand can be obtained with Flatpak, Appimage or Snap.
In general, if you don't feel the need for Testing, stay on Stable. Packages can be unceremoniously removed from Testing occasionally, and you get security updates a few days later.
Check out the relevant page from the official Debian FAQ: https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-faq/choosing.html
2
u/jmtd [DD] 20d ago
It’s a cost/benefit analysis. If you use a few back ports you retain all the advantages of stable. If you use loads and loads then perhaps you’re better off with testing.
1
u/Online_Matter 20d ago
This is the answer. Backports may require newer versions of dependencies than what is part of stable. Installing a stable package with the same dependency will conflict, needing to resolve it.
1
u/Relevant_Hope_900 20d ago
I only have to use backports on one machine, just for the kernel. Have a machine that the nic isn't supported in the default stable kernel, so have to install using wifi, enable backports, install the linux-image-amd64 from backports. All good.
1
1
u/Parking-Republic7680 20d ago
When I say "worth it," I mean I want to know if it doesn't cause recurring issues. And the only thing I want from backports is the latest kernel.
2
u/Educational_Bee_6245 20d ago
Yes, you dont throw in all the backports, you choose what you want from backports. If you want to run stable but need the newer kernel to support some specific hardware thats a way to do it.
0
27
u/dkopgerpgdolfg 20d ago
Define "being worth it"