apt vs. pacman: Could you elaborate a little? What's your main reasoning for this? I have tried Arch on three machines (old netbook, laptop, desktop) and all w

apt vs. pacman: Could you elaborate a little? What's your main reasoning for this? I have tried Arch on three machines (old netbook, laptop, desktop) and all went fine during installing (all LUKS cryptorooted). What made me mad was when some stuff broke on two of them due to infrequent updates this spring (didnt use both netbook+desktop for a longer time). Alas, I can't remember details any more. Made me switch back (to debian) I almost never use aptitude and dpkg only for low level stuff (e.g, when there are errors). Apt alone is in almost all cases sufficient.