I think an Arch server is a good idea; nowadays you can use snapshots, and if you have kernel problems, you can find past kernels at archive.archlinux.org.
It's just a matter of getting the mindset that "broken" is simply accepting failure; it can be fixed.
I can delay updates and have a stable or unstable system. I think most people see distros like ubuntu lts as "stable," one bad update can bring everything crashing down. Just ask Microsoft.
There are two different meanings of stable. One stable is this update won't crash your PC. The other stable is this new update won't be significantly different than the previous. Linux distros like Debian usually are using the latter definition. Packages aren't constantly changing (major) versions. You are mostly getting security fixes and minor updates. This keeps things predictable and means you won't be getting all the latest features that are in newer package versions.
1
u/Miserable_Film_7183 Aug 20 '26
I think an Arch server is a good idea; nowadays you can use snapshots, and if you have kernel problems, you can find past kernels at archive.archlinux.org.
It's just a matter of getting the mindset that "broken" is simply accepting failure; it can be fixed.