I've just read an article from Matt Hartley (him from Linux Action Show) about rolling release vs fixed release distros. Even though in general I do agree with some of his comments but I get the impression that the only rolling release distro he's used is Arch.
On one of my computers I have Manjaro using the stable branch which is a rolling release distro, new versions of all packages come through every 2 to 3 weeks. This system is very stable as have not had any serious problems since I have had it installed. On another computer I have Debian (wheezy) 7 which as everyone knows is a fixed release distro and is very stable.
I have also read other peoples testimonies about Arch who claim that they have been using it for years and have never had any serious issues when upgrading, but that may be because they have read and followed instructions from Arch to upgrade without issues.
You can read his full article here http://www.datamation.com/open-sourc...distros-1.html
On one of my computers I have Manjaro using the stable branch which is a rolling release distro, new versions of all packages come through every 2 to 3 weeks. This system is very stable as have not had any serious problems since I have had it installed. On another computer I have Debian (wheezy) 7 which as everyone knows is a fixed release distro and is very stable.
I have also read other peoples testimonies about Arch who claim that they have been using it for years and have never had any serious issues when upgrading, but that may be because they have read and followed instructions from Arch to upgrade without issues.
You can read his full article here http://www.datamation.com/open-sourc...distros-1.html
Comment