“Stable” distros often had a long and risky process of upgrading to the next major release.
But you only do that once every 3-4 years, and you have months to carefully plan ahead.
Meanwhile, pacman -Syu could just provide you a major breaking multi-package upgrade of, say, your desktop environment on any random Tuesday. And then your only options are to either roll the dice and accept that update right then, and deal with all the breaking changes it may introduce, or not receive any updates at all, including security fixes, until you do.
I use Arch myself, and it’s been pretty troublefree the past 2 years or so, but it was pretty rough around the Plasma 6 release, and there have been other rough periods as well, like when there were bluetooth/wifi and amdgpu regressions in the kernel.
You’re confusing two different meanings of stable. When people refer to “stable” distros such as Debian, they are referring to the meaning of stable as “unchanging,” not the meaning of stable as “doesn’t crash.”
A rolling release distro by that definition cannot be stable.
Sure bcachefs sounds like a pretty good idea, especially since the author thinks his AI coding assistant is sentient and a “her”. What is it with file system maintainers and mental illness…
From what I know, the AI Assistant is the least of Kent Overstreet’s problems. If anything it’s a blessing he’s fixanting on a random number generator instead of risking becoming Hans Raiser 2.0.
it seems there’s elevated adverse behavior in people who work on things that combine deep hardware and software in general. see jailbreaking, emulation, hyprland, something
Fair, I’m always scared to upgrade to a new Debian release and the process is always painful. But that happens every couple years and I can take a week or two to look into it before doing it.
Every time I did pacman -Syu it was a Russian roulette. Most of the times everything was fine, but often enough there was a problem and something was broken and I had to spend a couple days figuring out what was the problem.
I’m always scared to upgrade to a new Debian release and the process is always painful.
At least in my personal experience this is one of the big triggers for distro hopping. Most of the people I know that stuck to one distro for years and years are on a rolling release.
I mostly run Debian on servers. I do not want a rolling release on a server, at all.
I don’t care how well they check their packages, I just want the thing to work. I do not care about new features, I just want it to work.
Ironically, it’s the rolling release that’s much more stable for me.
“Stable” distros often had a long and risky process of upgrading to the next major release.
Meanwhile, my Arch install has been pretty damn stable for over 10 years and went through several different PCs.
But you only do that once every 3-4 years, and you have months to carefully plan ahead.
Meanwhile,
pacman -Syucould just provide you a major breaking multi-package upgrade of, say, your desktop environment on any random Tuesday. And then your only options are to either roll the dice and accept that update right then, and deal with all the breaking changes it may introduce, or not receive any updates at all, including security fixes, until you do.I use Arch myself, and it’s been pretty troublefree the past 2 years or so, but it was pretty rough around the Plasma 6 release, and there have been other rough periods as well, like when there were bluetooth/wifi and amdgpu regressions in the kernel.
You’re confusing two different meanings of stable. When people refer to “stable” distros such as Debian, they are referring to the meaning of stable as “unchanging,” not the meaning of stable as “doesn’t crash.”
A rolling release distro by that definition cannot be stable.
TBF “doesn’t crash” is generally why LTS-distros do “unchanging”.
Same, and next year when bcachefs has nailed down the kinks it’ll be basically bullet proof with snapshotting prior to its daily updates.
Sure bcachefs sounds like a pretty good idea, especially since the author thinks his AI coding assistant is sentient and a “her”. What is it with file system maintainers and mental illness…
From what I know, the AI Assistant is the least of Kent Overstreet’s problems. If anything it’s a blessing he’s fixanting on a random number generator instead of risking becoming Hans Raiser 2.0.
it seems there’s elevated adverse behavior in people who work on things that combine deep hardware and software in general. see jailbreaking, emulation, hyprland, something
proof is in the pudding as they say. sounds like you have your own issues.
Why bcachefs over btrfs?
I’ve been on ZFS since CachyOS made it easy to use.
https://bartosz.fenski.pl/modern-fs-benchmark/ benchmarks say it all.
Sadly those benchmarks only tell me that they did test only two file systems on LUKS…
Fair, I’m always scared to upgrade to a new Debian release and the process is always painful. But that happens every couple years and I can take a week or two to look into it before doing it.
Every time I did pacman -Syu it was a Russian roulette. Most of the times everything was fine, but often enough there was a problem and something was broken and I had to spend a couple days figuring out what was the problem.
I always just rollback then wait until I feel like they might’ve pushed an update to fix it.
At least in my personal experience this is one of the big triggers for distro hopping. Most of the people I know that stuck to one distro for years and years are on a rolling release.
I’m only still on tumbleweed because I’m too lazy to reinstall…
That’s my point. A version upgrade having issues would have forced you to do it by now.
I mostly run Debian on servers. I do not want a rolling release on a server, at all. I don’t care how well they check their packages, I just want the thing to work. I do not care about new features, I just want it to work.
You upgrade?