Welcome!
Important information
-- Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities
-- Change in MX sources

News
-- MX Linux on social media: here
-- Mepis support still here

Current releases
-- MX-17.1 Final release info here
-- antiX-17 release info here

New users
-- Please read this first, and don't forget to add system and hardware information to posts!
-- Here are the Forum Rules

[Soloved] Debian 9 vs. MX L1nux 16.1

Post Reply
Message
Author
supusr
Forum Novice
Forum  Novice
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun May 29, 2016 2:06 pm

[Soloved] Debian 9 vs. MX L1nux 16.1

#1 Post by supusr » Fri Jun 09, 2017 2:10 pm

My question is about this quote from the MX Linux website: "MX uses Debian Stable as a base, but updates a lot of the userland programs & libraries, and backports newer programs from testing by building them against the Stable base. That gives a better user experience but interferes with Debian's dist-upgrade path. Our current choice is to stick with sysvinit instead of going to full systemd. So it's a trade-off: better desktop user experience at the expense of having to do a quick fresh install (which lets you save /home if desired) when the Debian base changes, typically every 2-3 years."

The newst MX release uses Debian 8.8, but Debian 9 is to be released in just over a week. Accordingly, I am trying to weigh the pros and cons of installing one over the other. I now use Debian testing (9) and experience no problems, but I really like MX because it doesn't use systemd, has newer packages than even testing (especially firefox), and is really polished. Is there any idea about how long it might be before an MX-17 will be ready, and what other factors might lead one to just stay with MX 16.1 until that time?

I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one with similar questions. Thanks for any input from you all...
Last edited by supusr on Fri Jun 09, 2017 4:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Adrian
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 8692
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 1:42 am

Re: Debian 9 vs. MX L1nux 16.1

#2 Post by Adrian » Fri Jun 09, 2017 2:20 pm

It's hard to decide for somebody else, it's what works best for you, if Debian 9 works fine than you can keep it, if you prefer some of the benefits that you mentioned (no systemd, newer Firefox, to which I would add easier way to create snapshots and custom Live USBs -- at least in my experience) then you could think about installing 16.1, it will be supported long enough. Or you could wait for MX-17 but probably going to come sometime late in the year. In any case installing it should be pretty quick, maybe you could install it on another partition and then decide to use whatever works best for you.
Last edited by Adrian on Fri Jun 09, 2017 4:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Stevo
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 15971
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:07 pm

Re: Debian 9 vs. MX L1nux 16.1

#3 Post by Stevo » Fri Jun 09, 2017 2:41 pm

At least we didn't take as long as Devuan to release a Jessie-based version.

User avatar
Jerry3904
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 22239
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:13 am

Re: Debian 9 vs. MX L1nux 16.1

#4 Post by Jerry3904 » Fri Jun 09, 2017 3:14 pm

About how long: when antiX-17 comes out is when we start.
Production: 4.15.0-1-amd64, MX-17.1, AMD FX-4130 Quad-Core, GeForce GT 630/PCIe/SSE2, 8 GB, Kingston SSD 120 GB and WesternDigital 1TB
Testing: AAO 722: 4.15.0-1-386. MX-17.1, AMD C-60 APU, 4 GB

supusr
Forum Novice
Forum  Novice
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun May 29, 2016 2:06 pm

[Solved] Re: Debian 9 vs. MX L1nux 16.1

#5 Post by supusr » Fri Jun 09, 2017 4:04 pm

Yes, of course. You are all right and I will just have to make the decision. Thanks to you all for the information and input.

Post Reply

Return to “General”