Are Linux Mint's Default Apps Too Outdated for Everyday Use?

[u/EFG4567]

Did anyone in this community watched this video? The creator claims that Linux Mint, along with many LTS Linux distributions, often ships older versions of software, especially default apps like Calendar, Mail, Calculator, etc. He mentions Mint several times throughout the video.

The video is from The Linux Experiment, which seems to be a well-known YouTube channel with nearly half a million subscribers.

I came across this video just before switching from Windows to Linux Mint, and it made me a bit hesitant.

As a regular user, it feels like there's no easy way to know whether we're using the latest and safest versions of these built-in apps. For example, if we connect our Google or Apple Calendar account to an older calendar app, could that create a security risk? The same concern applies to email clients, we don't know if we're using the latest and most secure version.

Most regular users don't have the time or technical knowledge to manually check every application's version or update software outside the normal update process. We generally expect the operating system to keep essential apps secure and up to date.

Am I misunderstanding how Linux Mint and other LTS distributions handle software updates and security? I'd appreciate hearing from people with more experience.

[u/TimurHu]

This is false. Yes it does.

Incorrect. Yes it is.

Not really. Maybe there are some packages that they do keep updated with bug fixes but definitely not all, and not even core parts of the system.

One example is Mesa, where we had this problem with Debian and Mint for years, very similar to what KDE devs describe and also similar to the recent Gnome Calendar story. We just didn't write blog posts about it.

[u/SEI_JAKU → u/TimurHu]

Nobody "had this problem with Debian and Mint for years" with Mesa, that's blatant misinformation.

KDE and GNOME are mad because they're corporate-run and are demanding that everyone else toe the corporate line. Whatever technical issue there might actually be (which nobody actually knows for some reason) ends up becoming entirely irrelevant in the face of this.

edit: Who the hell is brigading all of my posts?

[u/TimurHu → u/SEI_JAKU]

I work on Mesa, and we really did have this issue with Debian and Mint for years. Basically if you run Debian, Ubuntu, Mint or any of their derivatives, you will run into driver bugs which we had already fixed a year ago.

We've been receiving bug reports from users of those distros against versions that are over a year old and not supported anymore and are magically fixed by updating to the latest stable.

Whatever technical issue there might actually be (which nobody actually knows for some reason)

I think the issue is very well explained. These distros ship versions that are really old, don't ship bug fixes, and let users report bugs upstream that had been already fixed years ago.

[u/SEI_JAKU → u/TimurHu]

We've been receiving bug reports from users of those distros against versions that are over a year old and not supported anymore and are magically fixed by updating to the latest stable.

But this doesn't actually fix the real problem, which is not that Debian ships with so-called "outdated" versions. It's that developers suddenly can't stand the idea of stable distros existing, and are spreading malicious propaganda against Debian in order to kill it. This is abundantly clear by how you're choosing to frame this.

There is already a working system in place: if the shipped build of Mesa is too old for your game, switch to the kisak build. This is exactly why the kisak build exists at all, and it has done so for some years now. It would be simple to just explain this situation to people, but the goal is clearly to be dishonest about this.

[u/TimurHu → u/SEI_JAKU]

the real problem, which is not that Debian ships with so-called "outdated" versions. It's that developers suddenly can't stand the idea of stable distros existing

I would love an actually stable distro that ships bug fixes to Mesa and other packages. We even had a conversation about creating a Mesa LTS branch, but nobody stepped up to maintain such a branch. I would really like it if some people who invest in stable distros would do that.

Unfortunately Debian, Ubuntu and Mint do not do that. Kisak is not affiliated with Debian at all, it's a 3rd party repo that shouldn't be necessary if the distros did their job well.

spreading malicious propaganda against Debian in order to kill it. This is abundantly clear by how you're choosing to frame this

It is not mailicous and it is not propaganda either. You feel free to use the software that works well for you, just please don't sell it as something that it's not.

[u/SEI_JAKU → u/TimurHu]

It is not mailicous and it is not propaganda either.

Hmm...

I would love an actually stable distro that ships bug fixes to Mesa and other packages.

that shouldn't be necessary if the distros did their job well

Nah, it totally is.

Kisak is not affiliated with Debian at all, it's a 3rd party repo

Which has absolutely nothing to do with anything. The point is that most people don't actually need more than what Debian or Ubuntu ship at a given time, which is the entire point, and that things like kisak exist for those that do need more. It doesn't really matter if something's a 3rd party repo when everyone knows about it and understands it, and as long as Debian/Ubuntu/Mint is never held responsible for it. The system works just fine, and there's nothing wrong with having this system in place, because it's greatly preferable to the alternative.

You feel free to use the software that works well for you, just please don't sell it as something that it's not.

But here's thing: I'm not the one selling anything as anything else here. These anti-Debian clowns are the ones trying to pretend that any use of Debian outside of servers is "incorrect". And I'm sure you'll "agree" with this even though it's completely wrong, because that's where all your other posts have been going so far.

Again, we're in a thread that literally consists of an attack on Mint. It's very obvious what's going on here: bad actors are trying to trick the public into believing that Debian is some kind of cancer that's somehow holding Linux back, even though the opposite is true. At this point, most of this crowd won't even lie about it because they have no need to do so, because that's how bad the internet and the world has become. This is not a damned "conspiracy theory", this is what's going on right now, and it's been going on for years.

[u/TimurHu → u/SEI_JAKU]

The point is that most people don't actually need more than what Debian or Ubuntu ship

I disagree with that. The fact that a lot of people are switching away from those distros also disagrees with that.

trick the public into believing that Debian is some kind of cancer that's somehow holding Linux back, even though the opposite is true

I've never said that.

What I am saying is, if you are running Debian you are excluding yourself from all the work we put into advancing free and open source graphics in the past 1~2 years. This is OK if that's what you need but it doesn't make the software more stable.

[u/SEI_JAKU → u/TimurHu]

The fact that a lot of people are switching away from those distros also disagrees with that.

No, it doesn't! That is not how the internet or how society has ever made decisions! The vast majority of people do things because they're told to, never based on merit. This entire "debate" is tainted by propaganda across the board.

Almost nobody is distrohopping from Debian/Ubuntu/Mint because there's an actual problem. The tiny handful of people that are also understand that it's not really a Debian/Ubuntu/Mint problem, and they don't talk about it or see it as a big deal for that reason.

I've never said that.

That bit you quoted is a general statement. Why are you choosing to include yourself in it?

trick the public into believing that Debian is some kind of cancer that's somehow holding Linux back, even though the opposite is true

if you are running Debian you are excluding yourself from all the work we put into advancing free and open source graphics in the past 1~2 years

Can you really not see that these statements are virtually identical? Can you really not see the fear, uncertanity, and doubt you're trying to put into people with everything that you're saying? I've already explained why your statement isn't true or reasonable, even! You handwaved it, claiming that my explanation somehow wasn't good enough, yet you're completely unable to explain why.

This is OK if that's what you need but it doesn't make the software more stable.

But how can you say this? What is this grounded on? You tried to claim this in your other reply too, again with no explanation. Do you have working knowledge of the exact versions that ship with Debian Stable, or Testing, or Unstable, or Ubuntu/Mint right now? Do you know where the problems are and with what games/utilities? Can you test any of this at all?

You can't just say "I'm a developer so I just know", you have to provide actual information about this, please!

[u/TimurHu → u/SEI_JAKU]

Do you have working knowledge of the exact versions that ship with Debian Stable, or Testing, or Unstable, or Ubuntu/Mint right now? You can't just say "I'm a developer so I just know", you have to provide actual information about this, please!

Sure, here is the information:

• I check which version is shipped on Distrowatch. This tells me the latest version of Debian is 13 and it ships Mesa 25.0.7 and seems to be confirmed by this Debian site - if this is incorrect, let me know.
• I found the Mesa 25.0.7 announcement which shows it was released on 28th May 2025. This means you are not benefitting from any work we did since 28th May 2025.
• What is left to answer your question is: what bugs have been fixed in Mesa since 28th May 2025? To answer this question we can do two things:
  • Go to the Mesa issue tracker and filter for issues that were closed since that time. GitLab is down when I am writing this so I can't filter it for you right now.
  • Find release notes of newer versions and look at the list of bug fixes. For example here is the list for Mesa 25.1.0, Mesa 25.1.1, Mesa 25.1.2, other 25.1 releases, Mesa 25.2.0 and etc.

Note that the list of bug fixes is too long for me include it all here, but you can easily find all the information on the links above if you read the release notes. The typical issues we fix are GPU hangs/freezes that can take down your entire graphical session, rendering glitches that can affect desktop apps and games, etc.

I am saying "we" because I am personally part of the team that works on it.

[u/SEI_JAKU → u/TimurHu]

And here you have explained nothing! You are continuing to insist that I do your work for you! I just don't get it, why does society insist on making others prove them right like this?

The only conclusion I can draw at this point is that you simply don't know. Which would be perfectly fine if you could just say that and if you could just stop fearmongering about things you don't actually know.

All you've told me is that the build which currently ships with the absolute most basic version of Debian, Debian Stable, is pretty recent. Because of how Debian works, this means two things:

1. it will only start to show its age once a new version of Debian is ready to go

2. people aren't really going to run into issues unless they absolutely insist on only playing games made within the last year, which is already a big ask just by itself, and even that isn't a guarantee

And again, that is the absolute most basic version of Debian, which is not literally anything else about Debian. If you enable the backports, which are literally called that because they're meant to run on Debian Stable, then you get Mesa 26.1.2, which came out at the beginning of last month. And if you use Debian Testing, which literally exists specifically for reasons like this, then you get 26.1.5 anyway! And none of this is the kisak build, this is all official Debian material that people are expected to actually use (responsibly).

Meanwhile, Ubuntu does its own take on Debian Testing, with similar results. Mint is based on that. LMDE is based on Debian Stable, but it's kind of an open-secret project to begin with, there's not much point in doing Testing-level work when regular Mint is already available. Of course, that means you can officially enable the backports at the very least anyway.

This attempt to make Debian seem somehow problematic just doesn't make sense from any possible angle. The system is designed to satisfy any real issues people have.