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
      0
      ·
      4 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
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 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.

        But I layer about 20 packages, which is not a really nice process on Atomic, while it works for sure.

        • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 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.