How unstable are Debian testing and unstable? I really like Debian,

>>55560344
First of all you should not use testing ever. Reasons? Testing is stabilization branch for stable and that means developers work on it with no guarantees for the user. It's work in progress. This results in:
- Testing does not have security patches
- Tasting may not received package fixes for a long time
- Testing may have packages frozen in place because they are not planning on shipping latest in next stable
- Testing basically freezes in place for few months before next stable and is then flooded with unstable shit when cycle ends.

The only branch you want to use besides stable is sid (unstable). Sid is quite stable in daily use but you are expected to know how to fix shit when it breaks. It breaks rarely but it does sometimes break. Are you capable of dealing with situation of console on login rather then your desktop? If not, then don't go for sid.

>>55560511
>sid
At that point you might as well just use arch.

>>55560511
I'm perfectly fine with fixing things when they go wrong. My main concern was how often this was required, but it doesn't sound to be too bad. I suppose the only way to know for sure is to give it a go.

>>55560532
Some people are just too comfy with Debian to leave it.

>>55560344
i installed sid so i would need to fix more stuff and learn a bit from it. in one year the only thing i found was a broken package one time and it was fixed 4 hours later. if you have apt-listchanges and apt-listbugs installed you will be fine. you need to read what your package manager does of course.

>>55560622
Sid is getting worse more you go away from common packages. If you use mate instead of gnome for instance, you will face issues more.

>>55560679
mate is still pretty common, i use lots of stuff that is rare. but i have a relatively minimal system so there is not much that could break.