Should You Use A Rolling Or Point Release Distro
thekernalblog.github.ioWhen your read reviews of Linux distros, a lot of the time you will hear the terms, “Rolling release” and “Point release” a lot. A point release distro has many different versions, while a rolling release distro has one version, that gets continually updated, and you will never have to upgrade to a new release. Having a rolling release distro or a point release distro is one of the most important decisions when it comes to what Linux distro you want to use, so I am going to explain why you should consider using a rolling release or point release distro.
You must log in or register to comment.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word “Linux” in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
- 0 users online
- 5 users / day
- 20 users / week
- 27 users / month
- 16 users / 6 months
- 20 subscribers
- 684 Posts
- 1.7K Comments
- Modlog
I distro hopped for many years, until I ended up on arch (the rolling distros are kind of a stable end state for linux installs). I will say that the argument that “rolling distros are more unstable”, was completely wrong and unfounded. Many updates to things like qt or xorg have broken point distributions, and I’ve found that an arch install has been more stable than ubuntu in particular.
Rolling distros are unstable by definition - they change regularly. You are confusing (as many do) stability with reliability.
Same. I’ve been through many distros, and before Arch I stayed on Debian testing for quite a long time. I can say that for me Arch breaks due to updates waaay less often than rolling Debian.
True, Arch is a lot more stable than many people give it credit for. In my long time using Arch, I’ve only ever had dependency problems once. And Ubuntu, especially nowadays, is not the best when it comes to stability. However, I would argue that RHEL/RockyLinux or Debian are generally more stable than Arch.