Kernel version why not same as Ubuntu?

[Raymond Day]

Hi. I had Ubuntu running on this old 32-Bit server and because could not update it to ubuntu 20 only 18 I installed Debian server 10 but looking at neofetch it says it's.

Kernel: 4.19.0-13-686-pae

Still have Ubuntu server on a 64-Bit and it says is has this:

Kernel: 5.4.0-58-generic

So is Debian Kernel a lot older because the number of the Kernel is lower?

If so is there a way to update the Kernel in Debian?

-Raymond Day

[arochester]

viewtopic.php?f=16&t=139003 ?

[Raymond Day]

Thank you for the link.

I read the 1st post of it. Sound like it is good how it is what Kernel is has. Been reading some about it to they say Debian updates the Kernel about every 2 years. How long has it been from the last update. Because the numbers seem about 2 years apart not sure.

-Raymond Day

[Raymond Day]

This is on a 32 bit CPU: Intel Celeron 1200MHz (1) @ 1.208GHz why does neofetch say:

Kernel: 4.19.0-13-686-pae

Should the 686 be 386 for 32-bit?

-Raymond Day

[stevepusser]

It's kind of confusing, but Debian and Ubuntu both call the 32-bit Intel architecture "i386", with the 686 kernels requiring features that Intel introduced in their "686 32-bit Pentium III" lo these many years ago. These are very very old now, though some distros build custom kernels for even older processors, including antiX.

[p.H]

686 32-bit Pentium III

686 is the Pentium Pro which came between the Pentium and Pentium II.

[Head_on_a_Stick]

The Debian kernel is older because the stable release is designed not to expose the user to all of the bugs, vulnerabilities and regressions that the kernel developers introduce with every new version.

Linux sucks differently every time a kernel is released.

It's funny 'cos it's true...

[LE_746F6D617A7A69]

The Debian kernel is older because the stable release is designed not to expose the user to all of the bugs, vulnerabilities and regressions that the kernel developers introduce with every new version.

Well, it's true, but IMO an additional explanation is needed: every software that is actively developed is prone to bugs and regressions - and that's why, similarly to Debian project, the Linux kernel project has "stable" and "experimental" (RC) releases, details here:
https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html

As You can see, the stable Linux kernel v4.19 will be maintained until December 2024, and v5.4 until December 2025 ...

Regards

[sgosnell]

Ubuntu is based on Debian Unstable. Sid and Ubuntu have the same kernel most of the time. Debian Stable is a great distro for a production server, not so great as a desktop OS. The over-riding parameter for Stable is stability - it always works, as long as newer software isn't mixed into it. That means it's far behind the bleeding edge for software packages. If you absolutely cannot afford any downtime, run Stable. If you want newer software, and can accept rare breakage for a day or two, then Sid is a better choice. I can remember about 2 times in the past 10 years when Sid wouldn't boot, for perhaps 18 hours. I can deal with that. But I have no money riding on my PC working. Unstable doesn't mean constant crashes, it just means that it changes constantly, as newer software versions are added.