Why I should be running Debian unstable
anarc.at
anarc.at
There are some periodic times when dependencies aren't satisfiable, but usually <1 wk. Aside from not being able to upgrade a package once or twice a year, I haven't seen any downside.
It's great having the larger selection of packages available & I am glad to get latest greatest versions of things. I don't know why I spent time on "stable"... I thought I needed it, that life would be chaotic otherwise. And sometimes I'd have to go pin packages I needed at more reasonable versions in. But eventually i switched to testing then unstable, & it's been great.
Another of the things I appreciate about Debian is that they've worked out a system that can accommodate both people like the author and people like me.
I maintain dasel on Debian, and It's such a nice tool! I don't use most of it's advanced capabilities, but being able to convert from/to any of those formats with a single tool is very useful.
perhaps a more reliable option is to manually install a known good version of the kernel and any essential drivers and run "testing" instead of "unstable"
debian is conservative and works well for many people, but the (albeit rare) bumpy bits are just as bad as anything else in the linux world