And base64 util did become better

You guys are having own hostname in hosts file?

the ecosystem seems to have died about 2 years

Yeah, as I said elsewhere, less alive than before

it requires signing up to join the system

I think the point of the standard was that you don’t have to sign up with someone specific.

But in more general terms, of course one has to sign up with some bank or website or wallet that will receive the money or send the money.

AFAIK it was already working, though cumbersome to set up. Then a core enable stopped supporting it, and now it is less alive than before. However I’m not deep into the topic and the last info I got from this article.

There are efforts on a standard called Web Monetization

Built-in on Kagi, with community database

When Google Reader was alive, I wanted to improve its UI, so I wrote a userscript which completely replaced everything in the browser but still spoke to the Reader’s backend for data. When Reader was turned off, I only had to provide my own backend.

Your words made me look again into the documentation:

If your APT configuration mentions additional sources besides bookworm, or if you have installed packages from other releases or from third parties, then to ensure a reliable upgrade process you may wish to begin by removing these complicating factors.

I hadn’t realized that “removing these complicating factors” meant removing these packages, not just disabling their repositories. The wording is terribly vague.

Now I don’t say anything against your experience and the conclusions it has led you to.

But my experience was that only repositories were automatically disabled and packages stayed in their place. The upgrades went through smoothly, things did not break. Were I forced to uninstall these packages and look for their replacements afterwards, I’d be quite annoyed. Maybe not as much as you, when you were forced to reinstall the system.

I’ll conclude for myself that both paths can lead to happy outcomes as well as to poor outcomes. Thank you for sharing!

Well, people do not follow instructions and their systems get broken 🤷 To a much larger extent than an orphaned package

I had smooth sailing with Ubuntu for many years, but I don’t judge other people’s choices

Wow, what a catch! I should really pay more attention to people… Okay, this person having a really terrible upgrade would perfectly explain what I’m seeing.

Here’s a gold star for winning this topic 🌟

Is this worse than an upgrade which breaks the system?

What do you think of the observation that Linux@lemmy.ml had a surprising amount of reports of bungled upgrades?

Oh, that’s bad luck… Sorry to hear that!

Yes, the change of the Lemmy user base was on my list of possible causes

Thank you, I see what you mean. I think there’s a flaw in this logic, but I would rather not dive deeper into this topic.

they release unreleased and/or unstable software

Is this true even for the point LTS releases?

The first two pages of Linux@lemmy.ml show me 6 entries about such upgrades 🤷 Do you subscribe to this community?

Thank you! This selection bias was one of the possibilities I’ve considered…

Thanks to differences in personalities and personal circumstances, there are usually enough people on the spectrum of risk aversion to test the pre-releases