The way I have always liked to put it specifically is that Linux is not inherently more secure than windows. However Linux is inherently easier to secure than Windows. Namespaces, apparmor, seccomp-bpf, and a very fine grain limited vs super user permission system. Just to name a few top level things.

The tools are all there on basically any system, very well documented, relatively easy to use. And once you set them up they will not randomly change things on you. I say this as a system administrator having to deal with Windows constantly where Microsoft decides that they are smarter than you and fuck your group policy edits because we put out this update and we think this option is better so we’re going to revert like half the shit you did. Over half my fucking job and security is just checking what did Microsoft fuck up about my security set up with this update, and trying to rotate through security vendor 2094726 to fill in the absolute basic security processes that windows doesn’t provide

You expect Americans to actually understand anything about their own bill of rights? Seems unreasonable given how uneducated they are

Straight to bookworm. Sounds like that’s not supported but that just further shows why i don’t find it to be a functionally stable, or perhaps reliable is a better wording, system. But that’s also just my opinion

Was using voice to text, it auto capitalizes words at absolute random. However yes i do use EndeavorOS so it comes up from time to time :p

It’s definitely not something that will happen 100%. I’ve also had long standing debian systems that seem to not care. However I’ve had plenty that, for whatever reason couldn’t handle multiple major version hops and just eviscerated themselves, I’ve not had that with arch personally. You may need to download the latest statically built pacman depending on how old it is but that and a keyring update usually has you covered

I mean, if you want to use your system pacman sure. But you can just download the latest statically built pacman to do the large jump without issues. However i will concede that is more than JUST keyring update

Edit: another fun way to get around that issue pretty easily. Boot any up to date arch installer, mount the old ass system root to /mnt and just run

pacman -Sy

pacman --sysroot /mnt

Now just normal syu and the live environment pacman will update the old system, arch/pacman has a plethora of easy ways to get around what would otherwise be show stoppers on apt/dpkg :)

I mean when I can take an Arch Linux installation that I forgot about on my server and is now 8 years out of date and simply manually update the key ring and then be up to date without any issue but every time I’ve ever tried to do many multiple major version jumps on debian it’s died horrifically… I would personally call the latter less stable. Or at least less robust lol.

I genuinely think that because Arch Linux is a rolling distribution that it’s update process is just somehow more thorough and less likely to explode.

The last one with debian was a buster to bookworm jump. Midway through something went horrifically wrong and dpkg just bailed out. The only problem was that it somehow during all of that removed the entirety of every binary in /bin. Leaving the system completely inoperable and I attempted to Google for a similar solution as arch. Where i could chroot in and fix it with one simple line. But so far as I was able to find there is no such option with apt/dpkg. If I wanted to attempt to recover the system it would have been an entirely manual Endeavor with a lot of pain.

I would also personally label having the tools to recover from catastrophic failure as being an important part of stability especially when people advocate for things like Debian in a server critical environment and actively discourage the use of things like Arch

If the only thing granting at the title of stability is the lack of update frequency that can simply be recreated on Arch Linux by just not updating frequentlyಠ_ಠ

I’ll never stop hating that debian is labeled stable. I’m fully aware that they are using the definition of stable that simply means not updating constantly but the problem is that people conflate that with stability as in unbreaking. Except it’s the exact opposite in my experience, I’ve had apt absolutely obliterate debian systems way too often. Vs pacman on arxh seems to be exceptionally good at avoiding that. Sure the updated package itself could potentially have a bug or cause a problem but I can’t think of any instance where the actual process of updating itself is what eviscerated the system like with apt and dpkg.

And even in the event of an update going catastrophically wrong to the point that the system is inoperable I can simply chroot in use a statically built binary pacman and in a oneliner command reinstall ALL native packages in one go which I’ve never had not fix a borked system from interrupted update or needing a rollback

Shazbot!

Id hardly call that a user fucking things up, that’s not even good on paper. Those are a retarded pair of things to have next to one another regardless of any coloring on them. Especially with the same handles