Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 6th Jan 2012 10:06 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 502531
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2011-08-08
Debian "stable" tends to be just that. However, it's painfully slow when it comes to being updated. Debian unstable is often stable as well. But to say that Debian or even Linux in general doesn't suffer from constant breakage via updates is absurd. Most Linux distros are in fact not rock solid. Linux is a 24/7 work-in-progress. That's why there's a steady flow of bug reports, fixes and/or regressions, more bug reports, etc etc etc. And speaking of regressions, ...there are plenty of those. Why? Because (mostly) untested code is merged all the time. Why? Because devs are in a rush to merge their code and/or simply don't bother considering test scenarios beyond their local setup -- and that's if in fact they even have the hardware locally.
A Linux install, as with Windows, can last a very long time when properly maintained. Neither is immune to reckless user behavior and crap package management.