ArchThis Forum is for the discussion of Arch Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I was curious on using Arch lately as I have never tried. Mostly used Fedora, Centos and Slackware distros. The one thing I have been hearing is the breakages that happen due to updates with the rolling release system. How often do these problems happen in Arch?
Rolling release is by definition "unstable" in the sense of "tending strongly to change, not constant, fluctuating." (definition from thefreedictionary.com/unstable)
That being said, Arch is a popular and high-quality distribution. Many users successfully run it with minimal breakage with the help of the update warnings on archlinux.org (always check there before updating), the excellent wiki, and the Arch forums. I personally prefer a stable distribution (Debian, CentOS, Slackware, Ubuntu, etc.) but my experiments with Arch have been overwhelmingly positive, I would recommend it without hesitation for someone seeking a rolling release for whatever reason.
Rolling release is by definition "unstable" in the sense of "tending strongly to change, not constant, fluctuating." (definition from thefreedictionary.com/unstable)
That being said, Arch is a popular and high-quality distribution. Many users successfully run it with minimal breakage with the help of the update warnings on archlinux.org (always check there before updating), the excellent wiki, and the Arch forums. I personally prefer a stable distribution (Debian, CentOS, Slackware, Ubuntu, etc.) but my experiments with Arch have been overwhelmingly positive, I would recommend it without hesitation for someone seeking a rolling release for whatever reason.
Thanks for the Reply, I have been reading the wiki about it. To be honest I pretty much like almost everything about Arch except for the "rolling release" part. I kept questioning in my mind how can this distro keep going without breaking if any user can just upload the new repos without having tested first. At least Fedora updates are tested to a degree... However I am not too familiar with how Arch's updates are tested. Also another important thing about systems is the incompatibility issue between packages. I guess distros with a release schedule tend to focus a lot more on the overall compatibility of packages to make sure things don't crash as often.
Even though Fedora is considered a "testing distro for RHEL" I must admit that it felt more "Stable" then using Ubuntu. I definitely prefer Ubuntu's software Repo over Fedora's however, the amount of bloatware and the design of the clunky system has totally pushed me away from using Ubuntu so I stopped using it and switched to Fedora instead.
I was wondering if maybe the same could be true about Arch? If it might be more stable then Fedora due to its Minimalist design and lack of bloat.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.