On Thu, Dec 18, 2025 at 1:51 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > With debian, you always get bugs and late updates. Arch is far better and > never breaks
Distro evangelism isn’t particularly useful here. The claim that “Arch never breaks” doesn’t reflect reality. Arch is a rolling-release distribution by design, which provides bleeding edge packages but can and does experience breakage as part of that model. Debian prioritizes stability and reproducibility, which is why it’s commonly used in long-lived development and CI environments. These are different engineering trade-offs. One isn’t inherently “better” than the other, and framing one as “buggy” while the other “never breaks” ignores nuance. If a particular setup is problematic, it’s more helpful to explain *why* and in what contexts, rather than making absolute claims or calling it "horrible" with no further explanation. On 12/17/25 7:49 AM, Isaac Gonzalez wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I'm new posting to the newbies kernel list and currently learning kernel > driver and subsystem development. As others have said, working inside a Linux VM on macOS or using a remote Linux host over SSH is fine. Bare-metal Linux can be simpler in some cases, but if a VM or remote setup fits your workflow, then I don't see any reason why not (I also use a VM when I'm on Windows sometimes). What matters most is having a reliable Linux environment to build and test kernels, not the host OS itself. Raka _______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list [email protected] https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
