Manjaro has also shown how an Arch distro can achieve this as well, by releasing tested sets of updates slower.
But OP is correct in that’s not the point of vanilla Arch and people who use vanilla should assume the risks.
What’s annoying is people who use vanilla and tell everybody “oh don’t worry nothing ever breaks”. Something always breaks. You have a couple thousand packages installed on the average desktop system, dozens are updated to bleeding edge every day, something will break.
Manjaro maintains a crowd-sourced list of the most egregious defects (+ their fixes) that crop up in popular packages, suffice to say it’s never empty.
Many of them are not system-breaking and may not impact everyone, which is where I’m guessing the “nothing ever breaks” dissonance is coming from.
Manjaro has also shown how an Arch distro can achieve this as well, by releasing tested sets of updates slower.
But OP is correct in that’s not the point of vanilla Arch and people who use vanilla should assume the risks.
What’s annoying is people who use vanilla and tell everybody “oh don’t worry nothing ever breaks”. Something always breaks. You have a couple thousand packages installed on the average desktop system, dozens are updated to bleeding edge every day, something will break.
Manjaro maintains a crowd-sourced list of the most egregious defects (+ their fixes) that crop up in popular packages, suffice to say it’s never empty.
Many of them are not system-breaking and may not impact everyone, which is where I’m guessing the “nothing ever breaks” dissonance is coming from.
Fair enough. I am all for choosing a distro that aligns with the own reqirements. It is strange to use a misaligned distro and then complain about it.