Glad to hear it! My pleasure, always happy to learn.

Fair enough, now i feel a bit ashamed since you are way way more knowledgeable than me. I have only been a Debian user for a year and half.

I made the reply because i remember that when i was looking to enter into Linux, Debian testing was recommended as a great compromise between stable and unstable.

My surprise when i went to the Debian wiki and said, pretty ambiguously at that, that i shouldn’t use it! Reason being that it wasn’t as updated in security patches as stable. No one told me that bit when i was asking. Since i didn’t know the risks involved, i took the safe option and went with stable, in the end loved it.

I have to admit that for your case it makes sense to use it. You know the risks, know where to patch it up, and it helps to contribute to it by testing it and submitting bugs. Thank you!

I do still think that testing shouldn’t be recommended, but i see and agree that it has it’s niche where it works and can be great for some people.

Anyways, i hope i didn’t came too hostile in my first reply! Cheers

I disagree, the strong points of debian are the stability (long periods of testing, without new changes) and security (by applying security updates quickly).

Using testing or sid means to forego the strong points. At that point you are better served by other distros which focus on having newer packages.

Also i would be cautious about using Debian testing (forky).As far as i know its the worst in terms of security. Stable has security update priority over testing. And some people say even sid it’s better on that front by having even newer packages.

Disclaimer: I daily drive debian stable and game on it without hiccups. Rock solid. BUT i have 7 year old amd rig and the games are not demanding.