so a common claim I see made is that arch is up to date than Debian but harder to maintain and easier to break. Is there a good sort of middle ground distro between the reliability of Debian and the up-to-date packages of arch?

  • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Arch lacks consistency as they are constantly pushing the latest versions of everything. If you want that then that is fine but calling is stable is not really arcuate. They entire system is changing and updates are pushed weekly. You also can’t setup automatic updates safely.

    • BaalInvokerA
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      48 minutes ago

      I called it “stable enough”. For a home user, it’s stable enough. It’s a myth that Arch will break every update or it is unstable. Arch is as unstable or stable as you make it be.

      You also can’t setup automatic updates safely

      That’s partially true. If you’re trying to run a server, yeah, don’t set any automatic update. If you’re home user, you may do it and you’ll be fine, but be aware of your system.