so a common claim I see made is that arch is up to date than Debian but harder to maintain and easier to break. Is there a good sort of middle ground distro between the reliability of Debian and the up-to-date packages of arch?

  • UnfortunateShort
    link
    14 hours ago

    From anecdotal experience I can only tell you that not once have I witnessed a showstopper bug on Arch. I recommend using btrfs and snapshots to really make sure however.

    • Possibly linux
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13 hours ago

      Arch pushes updates as they come with not much testing. This means you need to read before updating as it can break things. Pacman is also very fast at the cost of stability and ease of fixing

      • UnfortunateShort
        link
        23 hours ago

        And yet I never do and it hardly ever does. And if it does, it’s more often than not application specific and fixed by loading a snapshot and updating again after a week or so, which is next to 0 effort.

        • Possibly linux
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 hours ago

          That takes my time which is valuable. I want it to work and stay up to date.