4 ms·
Ive gone through a lot of distros Mint, Ubtuntu, Debian, Fedora, mint (again), Debian (again), etc. However, when I finally got to Arch I did so because I had
by lettergram 9y ago
Ive gone through a lot of distros Mint, Ubtuntu, Debian, Fedora, mint (again), Debian (again), etc.
However, when I finally got to Arch I did so because I had no choice. I recently bought a new graphics card and it was the only one supporting many of the new features out of the box. The Linux kernel is always up-to-date, and I haven't had an upgrade problem in the 2 years I've been using it.
It's been interesting, because my second Debian computer which I keep around as a server has way more issues. It appears Arch supports more hardware, and in general (due to minimialist style) works a bit better on machines.
Idk just my two cents
- KozmoNau7 9y agoArch and Debian use the exact same kernel (Linux...), so they support the exact same hardware.
- lettergram 9y agoExcept, Debian doesn't regularly release updates for theirs - where Arch is always up-to-date.
- diffeomorphism 9y agoDebian backports has 4.12: https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=kernel&searchon=names§ion=all&suite=stretch-backports https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=kernel&searchon=... Arch also has 4.12 and 4.13 in testing: https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=&q=kernel&maintainer=&flagged= https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sort=&q=kernel&maintaine... Doesn't seem like an appreciable difference.