• bisby@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    The point of the meme is “Debian users are so proud of not having frequent updates… but when they do update, they have a huge backlog of things to update” … so yes, the fact that it’s not apples to oranges, and yet Debian users act superior is kinda the point.

    And I use arch on my desktops but debian on my servers. I understand the difference. and yes, 20+ config changes is a bit of an exaggeration. I more frequently have to do minor tweaks to fix things on arch, but I also don’t need to set aside time to do arch updates “just in case” … because I have had debian upgrades cause weird side effects that wound up taking up my whole day.

    The fact that i can go 2 years between those weird update days means I will still use it for my server, because “just security upgrades” is good enough for a server (even though I would love to have an updated tmux and neovim, so i could share config files, but oh well, i can go without config files on my server, debian DOESNT manage user config files, definitely not any more than arch does.). I don’t “not get it” or something. I understand why people use debian, I use it in certain contexts, but it does also have it’s own set of drawbacks.

    • Siegfried@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I use debian stable as my everyday workstation in 3 computers and had been using it for 14 years. I dont complain cause I know what the prize of true stability is and still think it’s totally worth it. And at least in my short experience, I never experienced any update issues apart from the two times I blindly created a Frankenstein Debian.