I'm not a FreeBSD user (I need CUDA), but I've read that FreeBSD includes a stable core (from kernel to desktop), while other software is the current released upstream versions.

Is there a Linux distro that does something similar?

I love Debian 11 for its stability, but they go too far. For example:

* Chromium is not current and has 100 vulnerabilities https://security-tracker.debian.org/...ckage/chromium
* Firefox is 16 months old
* VirtualBox was dropped from Debian, because the upstream dev did not have time to hold Debian devs' hands and help backport security fixes into "obsolete" versions

Debian's policy is to age all packages, but I think most users' needs would be better served by a stable core and fresh "leaf" packages (ones that other packages do not depend on).

The distros I'm familiar with are either bleeding edge (Fedora, Arch, Debian Unstable), or they are stale (RHEL, Debian Stable, Ubuntu LTS). No hybrids?

(I'm aware of snaps. I don't wish to use them. I'm not familiar with Flatpaks. I've read that their security is bad: https://flatkill.org/ )

You might want to take a look at Debian Sid; despite its being dubbed "unstable," I've found it to be quite reliable. It tends to have newer packages than Debian Stable, which has always favored stable and proven over bleeding edge.

Another possibility might be Arch. I haven't used it in a while, but I understand that it tends to be rather bleeding edge.

As an aside, I don't necessarily agree that having the latest release version of an application is de rigeur. I have not yet encountered a situation in which I was unable to accomplish what I needed to accomplish with a computer because I did not have to most bleeding edge version of the software I needed to use, but that's just me.

I mentioned it in the OP. You actually get the worst of both worlds. Chromium is still old(ish), with 50 vulns instead of 100 (see the link I posted). VirtualBox is still MIA. The official Debian Org's advice is that you must not use Unstable or Testing if you care about security or whether it will boot.

Also mentioned. The question is about having a stable core and up-to-date versions of "leaf" packages, like in FreeBSD. I don't think Arch has that, but I never used it.

Look for a Linux that allows you to settle on the LTS kernel. The current one is 5.15, available in the latest versions of Mageia and Manjaro. The previous one was 5.10 (supported until 2026), current in MX Linux. PCLinuxOS has both and is very up-to-date with software but it can be a bit rough round the edges.

max.b,

The easily-installed EndeavourOS is a rolling release based on Arch:
https://endeavouros.com/

Kernel is 5.14.16.

Highly recommended.

Installation:
https://discovery.endeavouros.com/ca.../installation/

I guess I don't find (K)Ubuntu LTS 'stale'. I find it stable and as up-to-date as I need. Firefox is updated to latest within a few days for example. In other cases there is PPAs to get later versions of other software if desired. In cases like freeCad, you just go out and grab it from their website to be up to date. In my day to day activities I have no reason to be on the 'bleeding' edge. The 5.4 and 5.10 kernel supports every piece of hardware I have too. I've also learned over the years that the kernel 'version' is really irrelevant in how the user perceives how the system is running. I'll pick stable over the latest any time as long as it works great with my hardware. As an example of that, I had to move from Mint (an LTS) to a latest flavor of Ubuntu back when the Ryzen line of processors was first introduced. New hardware wasn't supported at that time on Mint.

This is ostensibly the idea behind OpenSuse Leap. Stable core with up to date software.

Short of manually compiling the new versions of software + their dependencies you have shut down your only option for what you seek.

That being said while what is in that article is true it doesn't mean they are unreliable. It just means that most people who make them don't follow best practices in keeping things updated. As such you are well within your own rights to create your own snaps or flatpaks and eliminate those problems for yourself. I do my own docker containers. I could easily docker pull mariadb or whatever from docker hub. I don't as I want to be 100% sure of what is going on inside it. If there isn't an easily found dockerfile then I have to get it and explore it myself. Same concept. You want specific versions and maintained then get busy.

At the end of the day there is no such thing as a perfect system except the one "YOU" assemble. If you keep looking for perfection in other people's visions you will be sadly disappointed for eternity.

gentoo is the most freebsd like distro

There are a few distro's directly off of the FreeBSD tree. Not sure but there used to be a distro like Debian that offered the FreeBSD kernel. One of them did.

It's bleeding edge everywhere, unlike FreeBSD. Isn't it?

max.b,

I suggest that you visit the EndeavourOS forums and see how many people have had problems with a so-called bleeding-edge distro.

For peace of mind you simply add Timeshift and/or a backup system.

You have already been told that nothing keeps you from simply downloading the newest Firefox and run it as-is from a folder of your choice. On Debian stable.
You probably missed that important info because you were so busy stirring the pot.

Or create your own deb package and install that. Or look out for existing backports. Etc. etc.

Instead you keep on harping on what is basically the same subject, in variations and from different perspectives. Instead of doing something constructive about it.

I would also like to point out that ArchLinux is not bleeding edge, but cutting edge. There's a difference.
ArchLinux' [testing] repo is bleeding edge. Just don't use that.

Several times I have installed debian packages on Slackware by unpacking .deb files and by hand copying files into their respective directories.
Chromium-ungoogled 95.0.468.69 for Slackware is available in alienbobs repository. You could try in a similar way to unpack the Chromium .txz and copy files directly into Debian?

Thing is, they don't even need to go via Slackware.
A compiled FF can be downloaded as a simple zip file sstraight from their site. Same for ungoogled Chromium.