5 ms·

I've never had a problem with Arch linux. Why not run a stable rolling release instead?

• vinceguidry 12y ago
  Debian unstable pretty much is a stable rolling release. Don't let the "unstable" tag fool you, stability is a relative term. The author was describing a community problem, not a methodological one. It could also be a technical one, Linux seems to have gotten an order of magnitude more complex in recent years, whereas user patience has similarly fallen. It's easy to imagine that people with the kinds of problems described just dealing with it rather than troubleshooting and sharing what they learned.
  • deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  • spain 12y ago
    > Don't let the "unstable" tag fool you, stability is a relative term. I don't see why people throw this around a lot, it really isn't. Most recent example I can remember is when Debian decided to remove NVIDIA drivers from Testing and you end up with a nonfunctional desktop [0]. [0] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=755020 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=755020
    • icebraining 12y ago
      In my experience, "testing" is a lot more unstable than "unstable" itself, at least when upgrading. I haven't had any major problems running Sid in the last four or five years.
  • shmerl 12y ago
    > Debian unstable pretty much is a stable rolling release. I'd say testing is. Unstable is not supposed to be normally used except for debugging stuff.