Exactly what I’ve been looking for!

The true number messed you up so much you can’t recall it any more.

That’s the point - those mismatched packages often break the system. I had to do probably near a half dozen reinstalls after Ubuntu’s “clever” trick wrecked my system. I ran a Debian system from potato through to sarge updating each time with no trouble. My Ubuntu machine had problems virtually every upgrade (though most minor) and required more than a few full reinstalls.

The update won’t break the system if you follow the update instructions (remove packages from those repositories first). The Ubuntu way does break the system (see my other comment).

I don’t think so, because it shouldn’t be an automated process. Doing that blindly is a great way to have orphaned and incompatible package versions left on your machine.

I had absolutely no problems updating Debian to 13 from 11 to 12 to 13 one after the other. I also had no problems upgrading between Debian versions when I ran it as my main driver from the Potato release up until Ubuntu came out. Conversely, when I used Ubuntu from its original Warty release to around 2012 or so I had issues on literally every single version upgrade. Most relatively minor, but more than a couple requiring full reinstalls.

I would bet money that the vast majority of those having problems upgrading Debian are on “FrankenDebian” systems. Not all, but I am confident the majority are.

It’s extremely rare. Big breaking updates are normally shown in the arch news. Usually they just require a command or two to remove a conflicting package before the update. I think there’s been a few in the last year, but on the flip side I never got a clean distro update on anything but Debian and they usually took a lot more effort to clean up.

Where it may be “unstable” is if a specific program updates (upstream) with some major change or other, whereas another distro might hold off a while.

“unstable” as in changing regularly. Not in any way to do with how reliable it is (as another comment mentioned, that’s a better way to differentiate).

I’ve had far fewer problems updating arch (once I had a clean system anyway) than I ever did trying to move through distribution updates on various other more “standard” ones.

Nah, I looked at it and it doesn’t interest me. I like arch because, contrary to popular belief, it is quite stable (as in non crashing, not package versions) if you only install exactly what you need. I had way more stability issues on the more standard distros since they had so much extra stuff. Debian for servers every day though.

Nix looks interesting in theory, but is a lot of work and too opinionated for me. Far from an expert though and have nothing against those that like it or any other distro.

I’m in the same boat as you. Loved it for what it was on my old Pentium 2 (no internet). Learner a lot and had a blast. Not a daily driver now I have time constraints and binary packages lose what made it special. Happy on Arch for personal stuff and Debian for mission critical stuff.

But that’s almost never how a system is configured. The entire point is that bash, zsh, fish etc. can make use of those utilities. You don’t need bash trying to reinvent everything. You don’t want that. That’s why changing shells is generally painless and a strength, not a weakness.

Oh yes, my moment! 2002, stage 1 off a DVD with no internet connection on a Pentium 2. Accidentally selected everything including open office, Firefox and done other stuff I don’t remember then hit emerge world. One week of compiling later it was finally ready for the next input 😂

Linux gamers say Delta Force game is ‘not part of our agenda in the future’

Nor do I, and I use both Arch and Debian exclusively.

Yeah, I’m not a fan of flatpak for my usage, but this isn’t a great argument against it.

I’d rather someone “only” release on flatpak if that’s the simplest way they can support Linux compared to no support at all.

Sshfs isn’t the same as smbfs if that’s what you’re thinking. It has nothing to do with how windows does files.

It used to be a (potential) issue with sponging hard drives, though was debated back then even. I can’t think of anything that would be an issue for it nowadays though.

Meh, I used Gentoo in its literal first release off a DVD with only printed instructions for a stage one build on an old Pentium II. No internet or anything to fall back on. Learnt a hell of a lot (like don’t select Firefox and Open Office and do an emerge world as your first package step after the initial boot because it took literally a week to compile with no indication when it would be done). Definitely have a soft spot for Larry the Cow but after running that setup for a couple of years I feel I’ve taken what I needed from Gentoo.

Would recommend it to anyone who wants to dig in and really learn what makes their system tick, but not as a daily driver. I feel for me Arch hits the sweet spot, but was happy with Debian/Ubuntu too (at least until Ubuntu went to shit with snaps).

I think a register for each of the primes should be enough.

As someone starting up a custom t-shirt printing business desperately in need of building a customer base, I condone this message.