I see often people say that the distro you are using doesn’t matter. One can turn any distro into another. And I do not agree with that. If that was true, why do we even have so many distributions? I always said, if distros don’t matter…
- … why distro hop?
- … why don’t you use Ubuntu then?
- … why don’t you recommend Archlinux to a newcomer?
- … why don’t you use Kali Linux as a server?
- … why don’t you use Batocera or SteamOS as your daily driver?
- … why do you trust a community distro more than a corporate distro? (or vice versa)
I don’t think that distros only matter to newcomers. Maybe it matters for experienced users even more.


Being a “rolling release” has absolutely nothing to do with it. They still need to update their repositories and add patches to it.
Sure - a one-man-band supported distro could do all that. But a larger distro with a dedicated security team will definitely do it better.
Where is the difference between „dedicated“ and „commitment paired with skills“???
Sure, Debian and alike are up-to-date as are ArchLinux or Void. Oh, boy!
One are paid to do the job, the others are assumed to be doing the job.
You’re mistaking “up-to-date” with “patched in a timely manner.” The two are not the same. But you’re an Arch derivative user (btw) so I have low expectations. Suffice it to say that Ubuntu / RedHat / etc. back-port security patches to the packages they manage. They don’t need to be running the latest version to be patched.
I suggest you better stay then with Microsoft or Apple. Suits more your ideology.
Wrong, but keep guessing.
Oh, I see, you like being hold by your hands 😂🤣
Okay I’m done with you.