2 ms·
I ran Arch for ~9 years, and there were several cases of OS/boot-breaking updates, requiring me to boot from a USB stick and manually fix things when the update
by KozmoNau7 9y ago
I ran Arch for ~9 years, and there were several cases of OS/boot-breaking updates, requiring me to boot from a USB stick and manually fix things when the updates decided to shit all over the system. Having to manually cross-reference an update list with a list of "oh damn, you need to do these manual steps or you'll break everything" errata from the Arch news feed is not my idea of a good time.
The only reason the Arch forums are so informative, is because people run into stupid issues on a regular basis.
Mint updates itself and gets out of my way. That makes it ideal for actually getting shit done.
- erikbye 9y agoYMMV. Mint packages tend to be quite old, even older than Ubuntu. This is no good if you want to run close to, or, upstream versions, which Arch excels at. Of course, you can install software not using your package manager, but that defeats the point of having centralized package management in the first place and can cause problems.
- KozmoNau7 9y agoI used to think I wanted the very latest version of every single application, not matter what. These days, only Chrome, Spotify, Qbittorrent and a couple of others are the newest versions (through PPAs), everything else is just stock and works perfectly fine.
- erikbye 9y agoI'm not even talking about end-user applications. You have different needs as a developer. I need libraries and compilation chains to be up to date.