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
    ·
    3 days ago

    It is very complicated for little value add. I would much rather use Ansible or bash scripting.

    Ansible is useful in particular as it is much more repeatable and you can use Ansible pull to pull from a git repo

    • boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      The thing is package management, resettability, rebasing/redeploying with a config file, and avoiding config file creep.

      I broke 10 distros before, and of course I also learned, but I simply didnt break Fedora Atomic Desktops in 2 years or so.

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

        I use Fedora silver blue and it is mostly solid. However, it isn’t something I would jump into without an interest in immutable Linux or embedded systems.

        • boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          I think Silverblue is the perfect distro for random computers you never manage.

          Actually uBlue silverblue as they fix the like 5 issues there are, like an intelligent and actually automatic updater, flathub, drivers etc.