Using unstable branch for daily use?

Hi @ all :slight_smile:

I want to ask, if it’s a good idea using unstable branch for daily work instead of stable branch?


Unless there are package versions in unstable that you need for your “daily use”: Nope.

It depends. On your skills, your hardware, your luck, your dependency on your machine for doing work/stuff…

I do use unstable right now for daily use without major problems for the most part. But if/when things break, you won’t see me complaining about it. I would try to troubleshoot and if I can’t, I would reinstall in a breeze. Without complaining, or wasting others people precious time.


Testing is safer and a decent “compromise” between the other two :wink:


I hope you’d report anything that looked like a bug before reinstalling… :wink:


Sure, that’s the point. I already did many times in the past. I also vote on the announce thread polls.

I’m a lucky fool for the most part. I almost never got in trouble.


It used to be as stable as testing because it was basically Arch Stable package base with Manjaro kernels and drivers, but current unstable systemd version is buggy as hell so I wouldn’t.

1 Like

Okay, so I guess switching to testing branch would be a good choice, isn’t it?

At the moment I’m using KDE stable; but there is also a Dev-Edition - guessing it might be a high risk if it’s to much buggy?

Normally you should understand the basics on how Manjaro gets build:

So we are based on Archlinux and almost daily sync their package to our repositories. This creates then a snapshot of all packages. Next step is to see what might had broken. Often we have some headsup due to the todo-lists. Then we compile our packages as needed. When we are satisfied we snap that package over to our testing branch. Currently we try to test each package for one week. After most of the found bugs got fixed in that snapshot, we push it as another snap to our stable branch. This results in a delay of almost two weeks of new packages compared to unstable.


yeah, indeed. One might reports bugs or problems; or solving it, if it’s possible.

This may be misrepresentative though if few are using unstable as a daily driver, less issues will get caught before snap to testing.

Thx @philm
I’ve seen the image on the homepage. At least, I understand that using unstable which is used from Archlinux would be not “risky”? Therefore I could work or help on todo-lists compiling or testing the packages?
Hoping I’ve understood it now :wink:

There is a reason Stable is called stable and Unstable called so.

If it breaks, can you fix it? Is your goal to help in the development of Manjaro, or to have a stable, working machine? Ask yourself those questions, and your answers can help you in your determination.

In most cases–like right now–I run Arch Stable, which is the closest to Manjaro Unstable, and it is very stable. But when I run Manjaro? Manjaro Stable, but not Unstable. And why is that? Because that is where the meat of Arch Stable hits the unstable metal of Manjaro, including all that entails. And that is where breakage is most likely (except for possibly transitory Manjaro Testing). When I run Manjaro, I want it stable.

I know, I know, I know…quite a number of forum members run Manjaro’s Unstable repos, and for a variety of reasons. What would be your reasons for doing so?



Very good comment.
Manjaro unstable is mostly for people who want to help with the development, doing debugging and reporting bugs.

I have never touched unstable in Manjaro.

1 Like

Well, actually my goal is helping in dev of Manjaro. Therefore fixing it by myself shouldn’t be problem. But I guess that one might help eachother, if it should break.

Thus I tend using unstable. Coming from Fedora or other Distros; KDE is the best working DE on Manjaro comparing to other Distros :man_shrugging:

1 Like

indeed it’s a good comment :wink:

:man_shrugging: I do; the only problem I’ve had was the first version of systemd-240. Even with that, downgrade was my friend.

I use Manjaro Unstable on 2 machine, a desktop and a laptop, plus my wife uses Testing on het Gigabyte Brix box. I am thinking about bringing that back to Stable though. If I see what she does with her machine nowadays, it’s almost nothing. No need to have newer software a week earlier.
With Unstable I have very little (I might almost say no) problems. This morning with the Testing update in my wife’s computer I had a problem with but thanks to manjaro-chroot from a live USB and the update thread I managed to fix it.
So, in short, with Unstable I seldom to never have any problems and therefore I use it as my daily OS.


@DeMus thx for sharing your experiences with testing and unstable branch.

I guess I’m going to change now from stable to unstable and getting started helping/contributing. :slight_smile:

1 Like

i use unstable aside from qt 5.12 initial problem of older kernels not booting i did not encounter any issue.using 240 systemd no issue from start