Software are so behind in versions
Software are so behind in versions
| Software | Latest | Fedora Version | Pop! Version |
|---|---|---|---|
| ---- | 44.0 | 44.1 | 42.0 |
| Gnucash | 5.3 | 5.2 | 4.8 |
| GIMP | 2.10.34 | 2.10.34 | 2.10.30 |
| ------ | 1.3.1 | dnf 1.3.1 | 1.3.0 |
| Firewall Gufw | 22.04 | N/A | 22.04.0 |
| Master.mint21 (Mint) | dnf 22.11.2 | 21.09.1 | |
| 22.06.6 (TeeJee) | |||
| KeepassXC | 2.7.6 | 2.7.6 | 2.6.6 |
| affected by CVE-2023-35866 (upto 2.7.5) | |||
| Libreoffice | 7.6.0 (fast adopter) | 7.5.5.2 | 7.3.7.2 |
| 7.5.5 (LTS) | |||
| Popsicle | 1.3.1 (github) | AppImage 1.3.1 | 1.3.2 |
| PDF Arranger | 1.10.0 | 1.10.0 | 1.8.2 |
| Virt Manager | 4.1.0 | 4.1.0 | 4.0.0 |
| Videos (totem) | 44.0 | 43.0 | 42.0 |
| Nautilus | 44.0 | 44.2.1 | 42.6 |
I am "not" using Flatpak on Pop!
Most of the cases, those software are from Ubuntu repositories.. would Pop!_OS consider building their own, or as some other people mentioned, rebase on something else?
You are "not" using a flatpak, but you should and it would solve all your problems. It's the way of the future even if you read some FUD about it online.
13The current version of Pop is based on the 22.04 long term support version of Ubuntu. Its aim is stability, not bleeding edge.
Also - ubuntu back-ports security fixes to older packages. So that keepassxc is likely not vulnerable. The package version will be something like "2.6.6-ubuntu3" to indicate that.
12Why won't you use Flatpak? That's exactly what it's for.
11Flatpak is not Snap. Snap is the evil one.
8AFAIK pop! is not aimed to be a more cutting-edge distro like fedora. It is meant to provide a stable base with the up-to-date version of the software installed by a packaging format, like flatpak, appimagr, or snap.
If you dont want to use these packages, then you will need to face the tradeoff between the stablity of the base system vs using not up-to-date apps.
6Why does it matter? What are you missing? Numbers on a screen? It's not that old. Everything works perfectly fine. Use Flatpak if you want the latest version of a desktop application.
6i mostly worried about keepass for vulnerabibity and virt-manger not getting the latest qemu/libvirt update... but i agree to you, these package aren;t that old.
222.04 LTS will receive security updates until 2031. That's what the L in LTS means. Ubuntu backports security patches, and occasionally bug fixes, for their core, server, and enterprise customers. You can't compare Ubuntu versions of software because most of them contain patches.
5
There's no problems, everything is completely fine! Let's assume OP has no legitimate reasoning.
0
You always have the freedom of clone the src and compile the latest version yourself. Or if you want the package manager do the job, use distrobox and make an Arch container
2thank you
-2They're spending all of their time and effort on cosmic. This is why I don't recommend Pop_os to anyone anymore, not until cosmic is complete and released to the public.
-2This is one of the reasons why I don't use or recommend Ubuntu or any of its downstream distros.
For major and well supported applications, older versions based off of LTS is perfectly fine.
But tons of stuff on Linux is just better to have latest stable or sometimes even bleeding edge. It would be really dumb for some brand new linux user to have to build from source because the feature or bugfix they want won't be added for another year.
And no, Flatpak is not an end all solution either (although pretty decent at countering this issue).
Probably the number one thing this applies to is gaming. Kernel modules, Proton, wine, their subsequent forks, Emulators, etc. Most of this stuff is already unstable so there's really no benefit to only having access to an older version.
-4