Yeah, maybe I'm just not smart enough but I always have the best luck with Debian/Ubuntu style distros. I'm glad Arch users are happy with Arch, it just doesn't work for me

sudo dpkg --configure -a

my beloved

Define 'Break'... /j

apt-get is intended as low-level APT interface for scripts

Ah, that's what they call it now.

I wonder to what they degraded dpkg then?

Mfw I get to go through the same yt-dlp steps after a fresh install

You ... you understand pacman cli switches?

I’m more of a fan of just adding the -y parameter to skip the question and go straight to updating. Works with the install command too.

You can even add the -y flag to skip typing y. Which apparently doesn't work for pacman judging by the command above

uhm, akshually it's sudo nixos-rebuild switch --upgrade

This is the way.

nix flake update
nix flake check --no-build
git commit -a
nh os switch

Is the routine I've settled into. Flake update because I use flakes, flake check because it's easier to see any warnings about deprecated options and the like so I can fix them preemptively, git commit after the check to avoid back-to back commits where the second is fixing some issue with the first, and nh because I like the pretty dependency graph and progress bar.

Flatpak, not pack *

Don't use gnome appstore. It's always broken

Which Debian distribution are you using, stable, testing, unstable?

I take care of a couple machines for family members. Those have Debian stable with automatic update (unattended-upgrade). I can't recall the system or packages ever breaking. At most users are a bit confused when an update change the UI a bit.

Sticking to stable and avoiding third party repos gives a pretty solid system. Only developers or sysadmins might consider Debian testing. Only people working on Debian itself should use unstable.