3 ms·

YMMV. Manjaro's broken on me multiple times. I leave a machine alone for two years and it's next upgrade is almost guaranteed to break something.

LambdaComplex 1y ago
Manjaro is not Arch, and its maintainers have repeatedly shown that they aren't very good at maintaining a distro: https://github.com/arindas/manjarno https://github.com/arindas/manjarno
- glitchc 1y ago
  This is revisionist at best. Manjaro has always been portrayed as Arch with a GUI by both sets of maintainers.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - LambdaComplex 1y ago
    Maybe by Manjaro's maintainers, but certainly not by Arch's. I've been using Arch for a little over a decade. The position that I've always seen in the official IRC channel is that forks such as Manjaro are explicitly not Arch. Here's one of the oldest versions of the "Arch-based distributions" page on the wiki. It has a notice at the top that says that forks are not supported by the community or developers: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=Arch-based_distributions&oldid=437768 https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=Arch-based_distri...
whatevaa 1y ago
Two years with no uptes on rolling release is not a good idea. Two years with no updates for anything not connected to the internet is not a good idea.
- glitchc 1y ago
  I didn't say anything about the machine being on the internet persistently. It's a laptop sitting in storage mostly. The updates are for when it comes out of hiding.
bmicraft 1y ago
Arch doesn't support more than 6(?) months between upgrades, maybe Manjaro is the same.
- glitchc 1y ago
  I guess my only option is to switch to a more stable distro such as Debian or SUSE. Manjaro has always been touted as a very light distro, good for old machines, but its instability makes it a no-go.
  - bmicraft 1y ago
    The choice of distro makes almost no difference w.r.t. performance on old hardware, as long as it's still supported. The only (real but small) difference is between desktop environments and their choice of default apps (eg. file manager).

LambdaComplex 1y ago

Manjaro is not Arch, and its maintainers have repeatedly shown that they aren't very good at maintaining a distro: https://github.com/arindas/manjarno https://github.com/arindas/manjarno

glitchc 1y ago
This is revisionist at best. Manjaro has always been portrayed as Arch with a GUI by both sets of maintainers.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- LambdaComplex 1y ago
  Maybe by Manjaro's maintainers, but certainly not by Arch's. I've been using Arch for a little over a decade. The position that I've always seen in the official IRC channel is that forks such as Manjaro are explicitly not Arch. Here's one of the oldest versions of the "Arch-based distributions" page on the wiki. It has a notice at the top that says that forks are not supported by the community or developers: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=Arch-based_distributions&oldid=437768 https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=Arch-based_distri...

whatevaa 1y ago

Two years with no uptes on rolling release is not a good idea. Two years with no updates for anything not connected to the internet is not a good idea.

glitchc 1y ago
I didn't say anything about the machine being on the internet persistently. It's a laptop sitting in storage mostly. The updates are for when it comes out of hiding.

bmicraft 1y ago

Arch doesn't support more than 6(?) months between upgrades, maybe Manjaro is the same.

glitchc 1y ago
I guess my only option is to switch to a more stable distro such as Debian or SUSE. Manjaro has always been touted as a very light distro, good for old machines, but its instability makes it a no-go.
- bmicraft 1y ago
  The choice of distro makes almost no difference w.r.t. performance on old hardware, as long as it's still supported. The only (real but small) difference is between desktop environments and their choice of default apps (eg. file manager).