Hey, sort of Linux noobie here. I like the idea of a rolling release like Arch, but I'm not smart enough to not break it five times a day.
I really would prefer having new software to perfect stability though.
Is Debian testing anything like Arch, and is it stable enough to use?
debian testing is the best for beginners
testing probably receives more frequent updates
Yes if you're new to Linux, Debian is a great distro to start with. Testing has newer packages but it still a rock solid os. Head on over to >>/g/ and look at the /flt/
>>41924
i think you should just go with debian, but you don't "break arch 10 times a day"
the only times ive ever had a problem with arch linux is of course the systemd jump, and proprietary drivers, but i couldn't get the latter to work on any other operating systems anyways (amd you are shit)
Does Arch even offer any advantages over a minimal Debian install?
>>42060
>hype community
>trending linux distro
>all the cool kids use it
>>42060
Minimalism, customizationx and greater control over your machine. At the expense of your time though. And it makes you look edgy.
>>42123
>customizationx and greater control over your machine
You're aware that Debian is 100% Free, right?
So by definition you've got just as much customisation and control as with any other distro that's 100% free, and more than any distro that isn't.
>>42060
i would say the aur. i didn't appreciate it until i tried debian based distros. but it automatically installs all compiling dependencies and makes compiling a breeze.
also i am not fond of the hoops debian makes you go through just to install nonfree programs. even ubuntu is a pain in the ass with that. the aur is like a one stop shop for 'ppas' and you don't have to add new ones every time you want to install something and overall arch is just a lot less of a pain in the ass to use compared to debian
