Zhukov Pavel wrote: > It's like a beryl developing way - increasing features without > stabilization. After some time 30% of features unusable, other works > unstable, upgrade breaks anything. > > Lastest 'pacman -Syu' breaks something _every_time_! > > Why we can't keep small, and usable distro, which can be safety updated?
I think your experience is somewhat unique Pavel. I run Arch on 3 different boxes with different hardware and run into exactly one problem over the past month or so. (The upgrade to xorg 7.3 caused the USB mouse on my laptop to get disabled. See: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/8108 . And this is an upstream change, not an Arch bug.) Arch lives on the bleeding edge. It uses the latest and greatest software. As a result of that, things will break. And it's not necessarily Arch's fault either. New versions of upstream packages might change things and/or your config files might get out of date. I find that Arch does an excellent job of providing me with cutting edge software, while still remaining very stable. If you're not comfortable being on the cutting edge, then you might be better off with another distro. Ubuntu, in particular, provides fairly up-to-date (but not bleeding edge) software with good stability. DR _______________________________________________ arch mailing list arch@archlinux.org http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
