Another “difference between” Linux question: What ist the actual difference between them?
How fast/stable are releases, compared to each other and in comparison to upstream Arch?
I think I dont get the difference because in my understanding Arch is a rolling release and with both alternatives you want to stay as close to there releases as possible, but dont break you system frequently, right?
So whats the main differences?
Well, I’ve probably get 25 computer-years of it running fine, so how about you recommend what works for you and continue shitting on the hard work of others, and I’ll recommend what I damn well please.
Absolutely solid retort that totally addresses what I said on the merits. Also, way to nail the tone. Both hallmarks in debate from people that know they are right.
For anybody reading from the sidelines, most of the “TNT” in my analogy comes from the fact that the Manjaro repos are incompatible with the AUR.
Read both comments and decide for yourself what advice to take. I have offered my warning but do not wish to battle about it.
I used Arch for a decade before Manjaro, and I was under no misapprehension that the AUR was anything except a collection of community package builds of wildly disparate maintenance levels, with some very popular packages waiting weeks or months for updates.
If anything, the AUR got more stable in my experience when I moved to Manjaro. If you’re thinking there is any quality control and/or support keeping anything in there consistent, then you’re a bloody fool.