stable lts arch

reddit.com › r › archlinux › comments › 1lc302c › how_to_make_arch_as_stable_as_possible

updating once a week is enough have a secondary kernel ( preferably lts ). Don't run commands which you don't know what they do. don't remove or modify system files ( anything outside of /home/username ) unless you are sure and know what you're doing. don't download everything from aur; keep the number of packages from aur as low as possible. also prefer normal packages instead of -git packages. don't run pacman -Syyu without a reason. finally the ultimate tip is if there is a new kernel/bootloader/gpu driver update, check the arch news page . P.S: everyone makes a mistake eventually so instead of 'never' trying to break arch or blaming arch just have some backups Answer from Popular_Barracuda629 on reddit.com

LinuxBlog

linuxblog.io › home › quick tips for a more stable arch linux experience

Quick Tips for a more stable Arch Linux experience

November 11, 2024 - The first recommendation for a more stable Arch Linux experience, as with most Arch tips and tutorials, starts with a quick read of the Arch Wiki… Enhance system stability (renamed System maintenance). On that page, you will find roughly 20 simple techniques to enhance Arch stability. As discussed there, one often overlooked recommendation, is to switch to the Arch linux-lts package.

Toolify

toolify.ai › gpts › ultimate-guide-to-a-stable-arch-linux-135362

Ultimate Guide to a Stable Arch Linux

December 27, 2023 - Choosing the right kernel version, such as Linux LTS, balances stability and performance. Holding packages in Arch Linux allows control over updates and stability. Installing out-of-date packages can introduce compatibility issues and instability. Following a few golden rules ensures a stable Arch ...

Videos

10:49

YouTube

Which Arch Linux Kernel Should I Use! - YouTube

November 6, 2021

10:02

YouTube

Arch, Debian, and Stability - YouTube

June 23, 2020

09:16

YouTube

How to Make Arch Linux Stable and What NOT to Do! - YouTube

December 28, 2019

youtube.com

Debian Testing vs OpenSuSe Tumbleweed vs Arch Linux ...

07:43

YouTube

Debian Vs Arch Linux | Stability or Newest Packages? | Which is ...

"Is Arch Linux stable?", explaining Linux with Rolling Release ...

March 1, 2025

View all

Arch Linux

archlinux.org › packages › core › x86_64 › linux-lts

Arch Linux - linux-lts 6.18.29-1 (x86_64)

View the file list for linux-lts · View the soname list for linux-lts

Arch Linux Forums

bbs.archlinux.org › viewtopic.php

we might need systemd-stable as LTS alternative to systemd / Arch Discussion / Arch Linux Forums

March 19, 2026 - I have UPS monitor service written in sysv. ... Everyone has known that was coming, really ever since systemd started getting adopted. If you've put off migrating this long, it's not systemd's issue. Arch already uses the stable releases, which is currently 260.

reddit.com › r/archlinux › stable arch-based distro

r/archlinux on Reddit: stable Arch-based distro

April 3, 2025 -

I've been using pure Arch Linux for 2 years now and have quite a bit of experience configuring all sorts of things, from WM setups to custom kernels. But along the way, I’ve also realized that too much freedom can be a double-edged sword—one "dumb" config mistake and boom, my system is bricked. 😭

So now I’m looking for an Arch-based distro that:
Has all the features I need for development and daily work.
Is stable enough, so I don’t have to worry about random breakages.
Still keeps the Arch spirit, but with a bit of a safety net to prevent total disaster.

Anyone with experience using Manjaro, EndeavourOS, CachyOS, or other similar distros? Or is there an even better choice out there? I’d love to hear your thoughts! 🙏

Edit: have a tried with Manjaro, Manjaro is bloat btw🙏

Top answer

1 of 5

the most stable Arch distro is Arch itself, because some others like Manjaro break after some time my experience with linux has been similar to windows. I have to reinstall everything once in a while (but it takes much longer with linux). update everything once a week, don't use AUR too much, pay attention to outdated packages. use flatpaks and appimages, not snaps, and you're good to go!

2 of 5

>I’ve also realized that too much freedom can be a double-edged sword—one "dumb" config mistake and boom, my system is bricked. There's no distro that will save you from yourself.

reddit.com › r/archlinux › how to make arch as stable as possible

r/archlinux on Reddit: How to make Arch as stable as possible

June 15, 2025 -

So this will be my 2nd time trying Arch. The first time I tried it I would just update every day and eventually I got a kernel panic. Is there anything, absolutely anything I should know in order to NEVER break Arch? Do I read the update news?

Honestly, it's a bit weird "what should I do to not break the system". Setup snapper and do whatever you want. Broke it? Rollback and continue using the system as you want.

reddit.com › r/archlinux › how do you keep your arch system stable over time?

r/archlinux on Reddit: How do you keep your Arch system stable over time?

January 1, 2026 -

Hi everyone, I’ve been using Arch for about a month now and I’m really enjoying learning how things work. I’d love to hear how more experienced users keep their systems reliable long-term.

So far I’ve heard advice like preferring official repo packages first, using Flatpak when appropriate, and treating the AUR carefully. Are there any other habits or workflows you’d recommend for maintaining a stable system and avoiding unnecessary breakage?

Thanks in advance for sharing your experience!

Top answer

1 of 59

176

Not rocket science: You read the arch Linux news before installing the updates. You never let the system in a partially updated state. You be careful when installing from non-official repos. Including AUR. You don’t follow outdated tutorial from random people. Instead you trust the Arch Wiki first. Then the upstream documentation of what we software you are dealing with. You don’t need to chase the latest fancy window manager, unless you get a kick out of that, of course. But that’s a want not a need.

2 of 59

It's easy. Always pacman -Syu, when upgrading and installing, and never do partial upgrades. Use from the AUR sparingly, and only if I can't find alternatives in the official repos. If at any time pacman gives me a strange message or indicates something I'm not anticipating, hoof it over to the website and check the news. Follow any pertinent instructions. Sticking to these rules I don't have any problems. Arch is as smooth as butter and solid as rock. No breakages. It's only when I try to force my system to do something it wasn't designed to do, or I go mucking around where someone with my level of knowledge doesn't belong, that I break something. It's my fault then. The idea that properly upgrading one's packages causes Arch to break is blown hilariously out of proportion. No system is perfect, and yes, on rare occasions something will have been updated incorrectly and cause a problem. But no more so than other systems. I had breakages on Mint and Trisquel when I used them, too.

reddit.com › r/archlinux › how stable is arch linux nowadays?

r/archlinux on Reddit: How stable is Arch Linux nowadays?

April 15, 2022 -

Hello everyone,

I'm tempted to switch to Arch Linux because of the rolling release principle. I'm kinda tired of fully updating the distro when a new release comes up, always with fresh installs and so on because something (almost all the time), doesn't get updated as intended and stuff break. What holds me back are the people which are complaining about how much time Arch requires to be maintained. I kinda don't have this luxury: time.

I've managed to install Arch one (wayland, btrfs, kde), on my machine. It seems stable.

I have a ThinkPad T590 with i7-8665U, UHD 620, 1TB NVMe (any tips on mounting the NVMe more efficiently? I'm giving it the ssd flag).

What are your thoughts?

Many thanks!

Top answer

1 of 71

300

Define "stable". If by "stable" you mean what Debian means (static major package versions, no breaking changes ever), then absolutely not. Archlinux is NOT stable BY DESIGN. "Rolling release" in this sense is exactly the opposite of "stable". Sometimes things will change during an update and you will need to change your configuration. If by "stable" you mean that it doesn't have random unexplainable errors - then it's absolutely stable. Or, to be more precise, as stable as you make it, since you build the experience yourself. People avoid Archlinux on servers not because it randomly crashes, but because it requires extra maintenance, which is not something you want if you are ranching several servers. If you are afraid of random broken crashes and glitches - that won't happen unless there's an upstream issue or you made a mistake.

2 of 71

I kinda don't have this luxury: time. In my opinion, if you want something that's reliable straight out of the box, then arch is probably not for you. Arch is reliable yes, but before that reliability there's a lot of DIY that needs to be done, which takes a great amount of time depending from person to person.

Find elsewhere

Google Bing Mojeek

Linux.org

linux.org › home › forums › general linux forums › distribution specific › arch and derivatives

Stable arch derivative | Linux.org

June 1, 2022 - if your really concerned about stability you need to select a non rolling release model such as Debian, Mint, Ubuntu LTS Or OpenSuSE Leap. If you want cutting edge then you will have to put up with the occasional breakage. But they are usually fixed quite fast.

reddit.com › r/archlinux › lts kernel vs default?

r/archlinux on Reddit: LTS Kernel vs Default?

May 23, 2022 -

Hello! In what cases should I pick the LTS kernel (linux-lts), version over the default one (linux)?

Top answer

1 of 7

LTS, from an end user perspective, is basically for cases where you're worried about regressions or other issues that may get introduced with new kernels. Otherwise I wouldn't bother.

2 of 7

LTS is usually used where stability is needed first and foremost, such as on servers or NAS. Default is rolling, so you'd have all kinds of bugs, but also functionalities as soon as they hit new release - which you could use on PC for example. Or just do like I do, rolling everywhere :^

Daniel Wayne Armstrong

dwarmstrong.org › arch-lts-kernel

Install the LTS Kernel in Arch Linux ☯ Daniel Wayne Armstrong

November 19, 2021 - Or set the LTS kernel as the default kernel (for added stability and less frequent updates). ... Example setup uses the systemd-boot loader. Copy existing arch.conf to arch-lts.conf …

reddit.com › r/archlinux › how stable is arch?

r/archlinux on Reddit: How stable is arch?

March 14, 2016 -

When I first started looking into arch, I read that rolling release can cause some problems, because bleeding-edge updates can be buggy compared to "stable" versions. However I've seen some threads mentioning arch's stability because it's rolling release, since you can constantly and incrementally update your system rather than occasional big updates that can break things.

So are there conflicting ideas about stability, or do the benefits just outweigh the drawbacks?

EDIT: Thanks for the responses, lots of great answers!

Top answer

1 of 5

Arch is so stable that I actually dread updating other machines.

2 of 5

Arch has never frustrated me, only I have frustrated me.

Linuxiac

linuxiac.com › home › tips & tricks › arch linux: installing and switching between multiple kernels

Arch Linux: Installing and Switching Between Multiple Kernels

December 15, 2024 - It provides the latest stable release from the mainline Linux kernel and is best for general use. This is your go-to kernel if you want the newest features and hardware support without compromising stability. ... Arch as a server? Why not? The LTS kernel focuses on stability and long-term maintenance, receiving updates primarily for security fixes and critical bugs...

reddit.com › r › archlinux › comments › xuti3t › how_stable_is_the_lts_kernel

r/archlinux - How stable is the LTS kernel?

October 4, 2022 -

I'm new to arch and have been using fedora a while, i like that on fedora i have newer kernels and packages than debian but i love the stability. I would like to switch to arch because of how customisable it is and how lightweight it is, but i need the stability. (I do know arch is rolling release)

Top answer

1 of 5

I've never used LTS but on the latest stable release I have never had anything break. In conjunction with Flatpaks, i've had some great success at having a stable Arch install on my PC.

But judging from my experience on latest, LTS should be rather solid

2 of 5

Generally it is very stable. However, ArchLinux likes to adopt new LTS line quickly.

You have to look out for when LTS kernel itself jumps in versions (to a new line of LTS kernel). That is when the biggest changes happen and the new LTS kernel has been tested only for a relatively short time.

The current LTS line is 5.15.x and the first linux-lts on 5.15 was 5.15.13, switching over from 5.10.90. At that point the regular linux kernel was also 5.15.13 before it switched over to 5.16.

So for a short moment, Arch users on linux and linux-lts kernel were both running the same 5.15 kernels.

5.10 LTS is still maintained upstream and has reached 5.10.146 by now but there are no (official) ArchLinux packages for it.

So LTS in ArchLinux means - it's still reasonably up to date.

If 6.0 or 6.1 or 6.2 are decided to be LTS then I expect ArchLinux will quickly switch over again. LTS in ArchLinux means longterm but not outdated.

GitHub

github.com › harilvfs › archlts

GitHub - harilvfs/archlts: Script to install the Linux LTS kernel on Arch and Arch-based distributions.

November 30, 2024 - Get the stability of the Long-Term Support (LTS) kernel on your Arch or Arch-based distribution with a simple script. 🧑‍💻 · Installs the Linux LTS Kernel: Makes sure your system is running a stable, long-term support kernel.

Author harilvfs

reddit.com › r/archlinux › making arch stable?

r/archlinux on Reddit: Making arch stable?

June 5, 2024 -

Last night while installing arch on my old vostro i had a thought Does using linux lts kernel make arch more stable. Whats your take.

Top answer

1 of 5

It depends on what exactly you mean by stable, but in my experience most of the "instability" I encounter in Arch is due to a non-kernel package. Using the lts kernel doesn't help me if the desktop is unusable because of a GNOME bug or because Firefox crashes or etc.

Also, sometimes the lts kernel is affected by the same bug as the mainline kernel, Arc GPUs are (still) affected by a compute bug that was introduced in the mainline and lts kernels at the same time 2 months ago.

Will using the lts kernel make Arch more stable? In theory and maybe in practice it will. Will it make it noticeably more stable? Probably not.

2 of 5

What makes arch more stable is not installing anything from the aur repository. I see no point in installing a lts kernel and using a rolling one. For that I would use Debian.

reddit.com › r/archlinux › what are some ways to make arch more stable?

r/archlinux on Reddit: What are some ways to make Arch more stable?

January 3, 2018 -

I am thinking of trying to install Arch on my system, I have managed to install it within VirtualBox all good so after backing up I might try to install it on my system. I like how massive Arch's repository is and that it's very customisable and it's rolling release. Though it has a reputation for instability. I plan to run software that will be running 24/7 (Cryptocurrency mining, SSH server, home server, a sort of game streaming server, etc). I want my system to not crash so these things will stay up and running, I also use it as my regular PC. So ideally I would like it to be rolling release but not bleeding edge with a few exceptions (for example I would like the latest version of WINE). What are the best ways of doing this?

Top answer

1 of 10

Though it has a reputation for instability. It's reputation for instability is by users fucking up and blaming the distro. The main problem is that people do something along the lines of sudo pacman -Sy && sudo pacman -S [insert a package with dependencies]. This causes a partial update that can break your entire system if you are unlucky enough. Another one is people using AUR packages and forget to update them between ABI changes. Personally i run the testing repository and do some stupid things every now and then, and i have yet to get my system into a truly broken state.

2 of 10

I’ve been running arch for years, for desktops, laptops and even a server vm. Every little problem I had was either my own fuck up, or a broken update that was easily reverted (and usually, fixed within the day). Arch is damn stable from the start. Just never erase your pacman cache for a random reason and you should be fine.

It's FOSS

itsfoss.com › switch-kernels-arch-linux

Zen or LTS: Switch Kernels in Arch Linux

October 30, 2023 - First, let me tell you about different kinds of Linux kernels available to you as an Arch user. This is the latest stable Linux kernel. Most people use this kernel for the reason that it is the latest available kernel version.

reddit.com › r/archlinux › why should i use an lts kernel?

r/archlinux on Reddit: Why should I use an LTS kernel?

June 20, 2019 -

Pretty new to Linux, people keep telling me to use an LTS kernel with my first ever Arch setup. Could someone tell me why? I've been running it for 2 weeks with no issues, I can't really see why I need an LTS kernel.

How crucial is it to have an LTS kernel? How does it benefit me? Cheers! Now saying I shouldn't just asking for an in-depth explanation on why its so recommended and how important it actually is.

Top answer

1 of 5

I definitely wouldn't say it's necessary, if you have a kernel update related problem in the future you can always downgrade temporarily, but in my experience that's a pretty rare need. With an LTS release, you're less likely to have to do that ever, but again it's pretty uncommon in my experience.

2 of 5

It's more stable than the release kernel, I guess, and it's nice to have a fallback if the release kernel breaks for some reason. You can have both installed.

reddit.com › r/archlinux › am i the only one who has experienced arch to be more stable than any other distro?

r/archlinux on Reddit: Am i the only one who has experienced arch to be more stable than any other distro?

September 18, 2025 -

Arch, as a rolling release distro, is considered more unstable than fixed release. That being said in my own personal experience i have found much less stability issues on arch than any other distro. Including debian.

I dont know if im just lucky, but ive mained arch for years and nothing ever breaks on me.

Top answer

1 of 61

143

"Stable" can mean that the system doesn't "crash" and it can also mean that packages don't change. Arch is the former kind of stable but not the latter.

2 of 61

As a long time Arch user on both servers and user machines, I think Debian is more stable hands down. But Arch feels more stable probably because Arch has the approach of knowing your system. The docs are incredible, and you install from scratch. If you know your system there ain't much that's not trivial to fix. Recently I had a friend who experienced a power loss during an upgrade and their Arch would no longer boot. I checked it out, no boot after bios. Check boot partition, missing initram, check initram presets directory, empty. Check which package owns those preset files, reinstall, initram builds, reconfigure grub, good to go. This took me maybe an hour, but if this happened on Debian it probably would have taken several to track down and fix same issue just because I don't know where to look on Debian.