If we see Manjaro linux official website under the features menu, we see there is a point regarding stability.
Manjaro linux properly tests daily arch updates through dev channel and seperately tests Manjaro exclusive features and ensures stability and no dependency conflicts before releasing these features to the mass.
Similarly I would like to know regarding the stability of garuda. Does it release updates after Manjaro has released, releases simultaneously, or has its own criteria for testing purposes.
Does that mean that system stability is not your primary concern as you all heavily rely on timehift backups? I suppose in a previous thread of mine I was brought under notice that garuda primarily aims to serve home and casual computing purposes and also is preferred for newbies to arch because of its simplicity of use and installation. These statements are conflicting with your previous post. On watching some videos over YouTube I learnt that garuda uses some Manjaro originated apps to provide simplicity of complex commands rather one would run on terminal. Mostly regarding Pacman I guess. So can you please specify the primary aim of garuda apart from beautiful looks. Like kali is for hacking, debian for sysadmins, tails and whonix for privacy and orignal arch for customisation due the cli based installer.
Is it privacy and ease of use towards arch?
So if an update breaks arch Linux does it simultaneously affect garuda?
It is rumor or a fact that arch incorporated bleeding edge updated software at cost of stability and thus faces issues regarding stability and might break. Is this true for garuda as well? Then it's a great thing to have btrfs and backups
if you want stability and secure things you do not install every update
there is a proverb
never touch a running system
or you know what you do and can handle it
garuda is simply there are an software installer and after installation it function everything well if you want extras as normal usage then you must go deeper but for normal users its easy to use
my grandpa can use it without probs
but not every disro i must say
Got it.
Long story short,
Garuda pushes updates with official arch repo updates. Doesn't worry about stability as they have great backup and restoration tools.
âDoesnât break ever no matter whatâ or âpackage versions stay the sameâ ?
If itâs either of those things then any rolling-release distro is not for you.
A built-in snapshot system means you can quickly recover from mistakes you make with system configuration, and from a bug or regression in a new package version. This is not âstabilityâ but is a recovery route (and as far as I know fairly unique).
That has never been said by anyone with anything to do with Garuda. Someone (or you) is making Garuda out to be something that it isnât.
Garuda provides an opinionated default setup which meets the needs of its maintainers. You can do exactly the same thing with an Arch installation, but Garuda removes the setup time.
Garuda is not ân00b-proofâ, is not intended for ân00bâ users, and wonât prevent ân00bsâ from breaking their installation.
Pretty much - except you have a rollback function and can hold back on updating until the issue is resolved.
Youâd be better off asking Arch about what they do.
yeah you got it
you can make changes and go back easily
i have install it under windows and other distros
but itz integrates and its functionally it works fine
As of yesterday, the M version of Pamac 10.0.0-1 is not working and they had to downgrade to an older but working version of Pamac. I am running the latest version of Pamac, so nice. Have you ever ran Garuda? After over 50 years writing code and developing systems, I find Garuda to be stable, up-to-date, and, the Garuda Team is always there with the right answers.
Updates are more frequent and smaller, so resulting issues are smaller and more quickly fixed.
Arch packages are maintained to a very high standard and closely follow the upstream projects; if there are issues they are reported upstream to be fixed correctly by the developers. Manjaro builds and patches some key components (kernel, systemd, etc.) which can at the same time both add features as well as additional issues. Issues are not normally reported upstream so are not fixed by the developers, therefore patches are of varying quality.
Manjaro developers do not focus exclusively on desktop use any more, with much of the paid developer time now spent on various novel/vanity projects. This in turn reduces the time and effort given to normal distribution maintenance.
Testing relies on effort from experienced volunteers.
I've been using garuda for a few months. Only reason my install broke is due to my error and updates rarely broke it. Which also could be easily restored using timeshift.
Arch by itself is incredibly stable. The Manjaro stuff is just advertising B.S. Iâve used a nearly unbreakable vanilla Arch system for years, all the time watching many Manjaro users (since version 0.8.10âI found my old login) âStableâ systems break during majorâbatchedâupdates. They do not need three tiers. Just ask the folks that have been using Manjaro Unstable for any length of time.
I am grateful to Manjaro, however, for an introduction to Arch.
