I'm sure the volunteers behind those drivers will accept your bug reports.

Don't forget to be as detailed a possible.

That's the only extension I have installed too!

I used to have tree-style tab, but now firefox has got native support for vertical tabs so I don't need to install anything extra.

Installing new extensions is sometimes appealing, but the risk is just too high.

I often make the argument that uBlock Origin is so essential that it should be built into the browsers instead of being a separate extension. The restrictions imposed by manifest v3 are good, it's just that uBlock Origin is special enough that it should be able to bypass them.

Unfortunately, the huge conflicts of interest make this unrealistic. Can't trust developers funded by ad money to develop an ad blocker.

Here in Finland there are a lot of people brought to hospital due to heart attacks whilst shoveling snow.

I didn't expect that, though I can't claim to be surprised by the number of elderly people who go to casualty due to falling on ice.

The current "stable" distribution of Debian is version 13, codenamed trixie. It was initially released as version 13.0 on August 9th, 2025 and its latest update, version 13.3, was released on January 10th, 2026.

So as of today the latest "stable" release of Debian is a month old.

By contrast the last stable release of Fedora is Fedora 43, released on October 28, 2025 which four months old at this point.

Really once you get software that works all of this is pointless anyway, you have working software and you update once every year or so, or when you find you need to.

When you "need" to update is so personal that it cannot be predicted, but your FUD about Debian being universally old and outdated is clearly misleading at best and deliberately misleading at worst.

The Kernel was released in 2024...

Have you used Fedora? After using Fedora I was actually offended how bad Windows was and how bad Debian family was.

Its the best OS I've used in my lifetime by what feels like an order of magnitude.

My only terminal commands were to unblock some minecraft ports for my kid. You won't find a Ubuntu/Debian user with that experience.

You are getting too worked up about this, not to mention cherry-picking.

Debian Trixie, to my knowledge, comes with Linux kernel 6.12 LTS. Many people with more modern hardware want the most modern Linux kernel -- currently 6.18 -- to support their devices. There are also countless stabilization patches (I heard some of my acquaintances praising their Linux kernel upgrades as finally giving them access to all features of various Bluetooth periphery but did not ask for details).

Having a modern kernel is important. With Debian though, it's a friction.

Can it still be done? Sure, or at least I hope so as I want to repurpose my gaming machine as a remote worker / station and the only viable choice inside WSL2 is Debian. I do hope I can somehow make Debian install a 6.18 kernel.

Furthermore, you putting the word "need" in quotes implies non-determinism or even capriciousness -- those two cannot be further from the truth.

Arch and Fedora can't come to WSL2 soon enough.

...and none of that is even touching on the issue of much older versions of all software in there. I want the latest Neovim, for example. For objective developer experience reasons.

Debian stable is for purists or server admins. Not for users.

> You are getting too worked up about this

No. I just see the same person in this discussion making multiple posts saying "Fedora is modern, fedora is good, stable Debian is broken, old, and wrong".

Of course my reply is a little mechanical and biased because I'm refuting a strawman.

Suggesting that Debian's stable release is no good for users, when I'm sat here using it, and many many other people do so is crazy hyperbole!

Anyway I guess arguing further is pointless.

Maybe you can show me that person and their claims so we can work with them?

Because I'm not that person.

Sure I said users and not programmers. Sue me.

I was criticizing Debian's model. I'll be getting Arch or a derivative on my main machine but for WSL2 (secondary machine that is for now stuck on Windows) I don't have much choice so I'll have to work with a distro where I'll have to actively work against how it normally operates. I'll handle it, but it doesn't need to be that way.

> I do hope I can somehow make Debian install a 6.18 kernel.

There’s the backports repository.

https://backports.debian.org/

So you lose the stable and have to deal with terminal... Or just use Fedora.

You don’t lose stable. It will only install the package you select and deps.

Also the terminal is the main interface for Linux and the BSDs. Why does having to learn it is a negative? A computer is not a toy. You don’t drive a truck with no training.

>You don’t lose stable. It will only install the package you select and deps.

We are fighting over definitions, but now you are no longer standard. Things will be broken. I know this, I've lived through this for years before I discovered up-to-date distros.

If download Fedora, I'm standard. Everything will work.

>Also the terminal is the main interface for Linux and the BSDs. Why does having to learn it is a negative? A computer is not a toy. You don’t drive a truck with no training.

Thats outdated. That is debian mindset. Fedora just works. No need to use the terminal, sure it works, but you can use the computer for a year without ever touching it.

I need to emphasize, you could. You just don't have a use. You are never sending random lines from a linux form to solve a problem. Why? Because it just works. Sure you might unblock some firewall ports so you can host a server, but you aren't doing surgery.

I cannot emphasize enough that Fedora works. It doesn't need fixing.

Try it.

> Arch and Fedora can't come to WSL2 soon enough.

Arch already has an official WSL distro. Though you are still at the mercy of the WSL2 kernel which is always a bit behind (currently 6.12)

Does it? Just last night ran wsl with `--list --online`. Is there another way to do it that would show Arch?

I get the following when I use `--list --online`:

    The following is a list of valid distributions that can be installed.
    Install using 'wsl.exe --install <Distro>'.

    NAME                            FRIENDLY NAME
    Ubuntu                          Ubuntu
    Ubuntu-24.04                    Ubuntu 24.04 LTS
    openSUSE-Tumbleweed             openSUSE Tumbleweed
    openSUSE-Leap-16.0              openSUSE Leap 16.0
    SUSE-Linux-Enterprise-15-SP7    SUSE Linux Enterprise 15 SP7
    SUSE-Linux-Enterprise-16.0      SUSE Linux Enterprise 16.0
    kali-linux                      Kali Linux Rolling
    Debian                          Debian GNU/Linux
    AlmaLinux-8                     AlmaLinux OS 8
    AlmaLinux-9                     AlmaLinux OS 9
    AlmaLinux-Kitten-10             AlmaLinux OS Kitten 10
    AlmaLinux-10                    AlmaLinux OS 10
    archlinux                       Arch Linux             # Arch found here
    FedoraLinux-43                  Fedora Linux 43
    FedoraLinux-42                  Fedora Linux 42
    eLxr                            eLxr 12.12.0.0 GNU/Linux
    Ubuntu-20.04                    Ubuntu 20.04 LTS
    Ubuntu-22.04                    Ubuntu 22.04 LTS
    OracleLinux_7_9                 Oracle Linux 7.9
    OracleLinux_8_10                Oracle Linux 8.10
    OracleLinux_9_5                 Oracle Linux 9.5
    openSUSE-Leap-15.6              openSUSE Leap 15.6
    SUSE-Linux-Enterprise-15-SP6    SUSE Linux Enterprise 15 SP6

Ontop of that I also use it as my main distro for WSL2 for a few months (before I used the unofficial one).

The bug tracker for WSL specific issues is also here: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/archlinux-wsl

Thanks. I see much less. I am on Win10 though, are you on Win11?

I have come homework to do, it seems. I have no idea why I see like 3x less distros.

And huge shame if that comes with Linux 6.12 kernel. I might as well just bump Debian to unstable and work there. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

> are you on Win11?

Yes I am, though I am surprised that it possibly has a different distro list for Win 10 vs Win 11.

> And huge shame if that comes with Linux 6.12 kernel.

I actually lied, its 6.6 that is currently shipped.

I have no concrete information but considering the previous kernel was 6.1 it is about time that the kernel gets an update to a newer version.

Or just understand that Debian stable can be moved to Debian testing (or even Debian unstable if even 2 weeks is too long) trivially. The best decision that Debian has ever made is not to distribute or advocate for testing as a rolling distribution, because if you're too ignorant to change your repo to testing, you're really too ignorant to be using testing.

Admitting that getting 6.18 on Debian is some sort of insurmountable mountain is not something I would do in public while trying to show off my expertise. I'm not running it, because I don't need a kernel that's been out for 5 minutes and offers me nothing that can't wait a month or two. I'm running what's current on testing, which is 6.17.13. It's about a minute of work to switch to testing. I run stable on all my servers, and testing on my laptops, it is a triviality. But to all you bleeding edge software people, it's somehow rocket surgery.

> Many people with more modern hardware want the most modern Linux kernel

To run the latest version of Progress Quest. Need biggest number available.

> Arch and Fedora can't come to WSL2 soon enough.

So, it's really still Windows, then. I assume you've moved from spending years ranting about how Linux people were purist server admins and Windows was for users and just worked, and now you've chosen the same posture after being pushed out of Windows.

> Debian stable is for purists or server admins. Not for users.

You're not a typical user. Most users want a functional computer, not the largest numbers they can find.

>Admitting that getting 6.18 on Debian is some sort of insurmountable mountain is not something I would do in public while trying to show off my expertise.

I genuinely don't care to show off expertise. I just want a distro that works.

I'm really not sure what made you so rude but I'm not participating. You're intentionally misrepresenting because I didn't say even one thing of those you so criticize, yet have the gall to speak about showing something in public.

All the best.

I had meant to say that you update the system when security updates come out, automatically.

But upgrade to the next stable release once a year or so, when one becomes available. (Be a point release, or a real update.)

I read a story recently, which to be honest sounded fake, but it involved a guy donating a book to the children's hospital once every week.

That helped one person, chosen at random, in a way that is simple to repeat and scale.

It's a business park "out of the way", so it's not really prime real estate for local people at the best of times.

Then build houses. Giving away real estate for basically 10 more jobs and a highly automated facility is bad bargaining.

I think it was being purchased

Back in the day I used livejournal and for a couple of years in a row I setup a matchmaking site that paired users up.

You'd login to my site and see a list of all the blogs you followed, then you could nominate five of them as people you were interested in.

If they did the same, you'd both get a notification.

It was a cute system and because it was restricted to selecting only from people you already followed it was nice and local. The code was released at the time, but has now become lost in the winds.

I could almost imagine setting it up again for instagram, facebook, or similar, but .. getting users would be hard I imagine, and I'm sure the companies would try to sue or prohibit it.

GitLab is no improvement over github, their features are frequently half-baked, their site is slow, and outages are just as common.

I used to like Gitlab, and I've self-hosted enterprise versions of both github and gitlab, and strongly believe migration from one of them to the other for "improved reliability" will be utterly underwhelming and pointless.

Gitlab used to be able to take the high-ground due to the open-core model, but these days I'm not even sure if that makes an appreciable difference.

This pretty much, and it's also more expensive.

If you're considering moving away from github due to problems with reliability/outages, then any migration to gitlab will not make you happy.

Thanks for the heads up.

Yeah here in Finland the archive site seems to come and go on a monthly basis.