Hacker News Reader

Comment by glitchc | Hacker News Reader

YMMV. Manjaro's broken on me multiple times. I leave a machine alone for two years and it's next upgrade is almost guaranteed to break something.

View on HN

Manjaro is not Arch, and its maintainers have repeatedly shown that they aren't very good at maintaining a distro: https://github.com/arindas/manjarno

This is revisionist at best. Manjaro has always been portrayed as Arch with a GUI by both sets of maintainers.

Maybe by Manjaro's maintainers, but certainly not by Arch's. I've been using Arch for a little over a decade. The position that I've always seen in the official IRC channel is that forks such as Manjaro are explicitly not Arch.

Here's one of the oldest versions of the "Arch-based distributions" page on the wiki. It has a notice at the top that says that forks are not supported by the community or developers: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=Arch-based_distri...

Two years with no uptes on rolling release is not a good idea. Two years with no updates for anything not connected to the internet is not a good idea.

I didn't say anything about the machine being on the internet persistently. It's a laptop sitting in storage mostly. The updates are for when it comes out of hiding.

Arch doesn't support more than 6(?) months between upgrades, maybe Manjaro is the same.

I guess my only option is to switch to a more stable distro such as Debian or SUSE. Manjaro has always been touted as a very light distro, good for old machines, but its instability makes it a no-go.

The choice of distro makes almost no difference w.r.t. performance on old hardware, as long as it's still supported.

The only (real but small) difference is between desktop environments and their choice of default apps (eg. file manager).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com