Sometimes I read linux advice articles and they certainly come up when I’m looking up commands on the internet. One trend I strongly disagree with is the (false?) claim that rolling release linuxes are somehow inherently less stable than LTS or other linux release systems. I really don’t agree with that trend and can’t understand why it keeps popping up all over the internet. I just don’t think it’s true. A nd this is just my opinion, but I find that it’s OTHER THINGS that cause instability, and I found more of those under Debian/Ubuntu because of their apt/dpkg/repo system being complex, for one thing. The bloat didn’t help either when trying to remove things that apt wouldn’t allow. I think “dependency hell” was a bigger issue for me back then, instead of the release schedule. As soon as I switched to Arch-based linuxes and got used to pacman/octopi I didn’t have those problems anymore. And on both Manjaro and CachyOS, I’ve really never had a system update “break” the whole system. I’m not saying that it didn’t happen to somebody else in the past, but for me, it just never happened. And so it makes the gossip blaming “rolling releases” seem even harder to believe. Well, that’s my rant. This isn’t necessarily important. Thanks for reading.