>stable like debian>rolling release like fedorayep, I'm thinking based
>>106637484Neet toy.
>>106637497>toythis isn't the mac thread
>>106637484Fedora isn't rolling releaseAnd 'stable' in the case of debian is literally defined by them as unchanging version numbers for software. So this can't be "stable like debian" if software gets version bumps with updates.So what I get from this thread is that OP, an arch user, knows absolutely nothing about linux, as expected from an archtard.And finally, install gentoo.
>>106637484LARBS has entered the chat
>>106637508>NOOOOO shipping stable releases of packages doesnt make you stable, we should let debian trannies redefine words!
>>106637503Neets can't afford macs.
I've been using the same install for a decade now so the instability memes are just not real.
>>106637519This is also the definition used by rhel and almsot every other enterprise solutions corporations.If you can't wrap your head around the idea of technical definitions and how they're different from linguistic usage of a word, then you're again showing how retarded you are.I repeat, arch users once again proving to the whole world how absolutely ignorant they are.This and, we're glossing over the fact that you, i.e. the idiot, thought fedora was rolling when it notoriously isn't.
>>106637571Im not OP, just making fun of the lack of distinction between "unchanging packages" and "shipping stable package" in the context of a distribution (a bundle of fucking packages)
>>106637515 How do you live like a NEET and yet still go bald before 40?
>>106637620Redhat's definition:The stability of the Applications Program Interface (API) and the Applications Binary Interface (ABI).I'd recommend you ask your AI companion to explain what that means since you obviously wouldn't know, being the idiot and all. But updating packages effects API and ABI consistency, and thus, a direct consequence to lack of stability. This is why "unchanging packages" and "shipping stable packages" are essentially the same thing. This is also why both debian, RHEL, and SLE go through rigorous testing phases spanning atleast 2 years before they decide to upgrade packages. To maintain such stability. I it were possible to maintain such stable APIs and ABIs these big corpos that build server software that the entire world literally depends on would have jumped at it before anyone else.Your bank uses RHEL, for example. Because it achieves that level of stability, which to this day no rolling distro has come even close to emulating.
>>106637672nice try but my bank uses windows 7
>>106637672>This is why "unchanging packages" and "shipping stable packages" are essentially the same thing.>calls me the idiotbuddy I obviously meant the arch model with "shipping stable packages". it ships the latest packages marked *stable* by the programmers of that software. do you now finally understand the ambiguity I was referring to?>b-but muh distro jannies are more important than software engineerslollmao even
>>106637968arch isn't stable so you and this whole thread is retarded and wrong
>>106637986arch is stable an you will never be a real woman
>>106637484>stable like debian>arch
>>106638031>picwhat distro is she using?looking at that laptop it had better be asahi or we're having issues
>>106638031yes, i know it's hard for debain niggers to understand that it is possible to have the latest packages and have no bugs
>>106638049>no bugs>on archlollmao even
>>106638064>debain nigger complaining about bugscope, arch is the best distro a linux user can get
Arch is unironically more stable than Uboongo.
>>106637484>arch>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>stableI don't upgrade my oldstable debian boxes because I'm scared of breaking upgrades that break my wifi or crash my GPU driver.>uname -a>Linux $HOSTNAME 6.1.0-12-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.52-1 (2023-09-07) x86_64 GNU/Linux>cat /etc/debian_version>12.1The last time I ran arch was 15 years ago and the machine lasted like 2 weeks before it would GPU lockup playing a flash video or something.
>>106637484>>stable like debianYou mean "stable like fedora", right?
>>106637484>stable like debianlol, lmao even
>>10663748415 years on arch using the same install essentially although its transferred drives quite a few times and no issues. bugs but bugs in the way of like my screen flickered a couple times a day for a week until the fix was made and released. it really hasn't had anything major come up that made me think it was unusable. I see window updates bricking machines and I can say with confidence that not once in 15 years has an arch update bricked my machine.
>>106637484it can't be stable like debian because "debian stable" implies an unchanging api and package functionality
