On 15/8/24 21:20, Karen Lewellen wrote:
More than a few sources suggest there are hundreds of millions of people on the planet experiencing blindness. For you to state that if a few are managing a task then a person must be doing it wrong does not reflect how much like clay Linux can be, how often a slight change even an upgrade can negatively impact results.
Anyone who runs Debian Sid (also known as "Unstable") is more likely than most to encounter exactly those issues, which is why it's primarily recommended for Debian developers rather than users. I've run it successfully, but I built effective Linux system administration skills first, and I was prepared to spend time and research effort recovering from the problems that occasionally arose.
If the purpose is primarily to engage in development efforts or to experiment, then Debian Sid is fine, but for every-day use, there are better alternatives, unless you're comfortable with dealing with the problems that running an unstable operating system can bring, and contributing to the Debian bug reporting process.
Debian Stable, Fedora, Ubuntu and other options are more likely to be reliable when upgraded. If you want a very up to date distribution, then Arch Linux would provide recent packages, but it also assumes knowledge of the command line interface and system administration.
The essence of what I'm saying is: there are tradeoffs involved in deciding what distribution to run, and it depends on one's level of technical competence and comfort, among other factors.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blinux-list+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxx.