On Fri 23 Dec 2011 10:42 +0000, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
On Friday 23 Dec 2011 05:32:25 Jonathan Vasquez wrote:
I wanted to know what was he trying to say? Is he saying that Arch and other Arch-like distros aren't serious distros that aren't meant for production? I mean I understand that Arch is rolling release and all that, but it's packages are marked stable by their corresponding upstreams.
I think the point is that it can be dangerous to use ArchLinux for critical applications, because there are occasional breakages during updates. That's simply because Arch doesn't have a development cycle including a QA phase. Distributions such as Debian can make certain guarantees about the stability of their software, because they only use older and thoroughly-tested software by default.
QA like when Debian broke SSL? I would rather trust Arch Linux for critical applications.