Average rolling release distro user experience
I'd automate it but the greybeards tell me it's a bad idea :(
I do the same as OP with my Fedora workstation, which is wait till I have to summon all the available mirrors just to serve me several gigs of software updates every other week.
For my servers I have an ansible script to update most of the machines. I fire that up every start of the month after the automatic backups. Seems like I'm a week late again already. In these I use apt dist-upgrade since that seems more robust, but I'm still to shy to run it in a cron job.
Not if you update every 4 hours ;-)
Just think of all the great things you're going to learn about emergency boot recovery!
Side note: "I'mma" is a contraction of the whole phrase "I'm going to" or "I'm about to" so it's followed immediately by the verb indicating what you'll be doing:
"I'mma rawdog this sucker without backups."
Yes, I added sucker, because it's going to suck up all your time and data, sucka!
Op should have used "I'm finna rawdog this jawn no backup style"
For no reason other than mixed US slang from different regions sounds funnier to my ear
"no backup style" hits just right.
I’ve always thought of it as I am gonna
That's the lightly slangy version I would normally use, but as long as I was being pedantic I thought I'd better avoid any contractions in that part.
Just do a fresh install man. I'm getting anxiety just by looking at it.
If forgetting/not wanting to update puts you in this hole, like… ever, you should really give an atomic distro some serious consideration.
Say more please? What's the advantage?
The system files aren't writable, instead you download a new system image when you want to update. No dependency hell or weird issues because these system images are all tested. Your system also keeps one or two old ones around and if by some chance something does go wrong you just select the old one at boot.
Downside is you're more limited on installing software. You can force install things the traditional way but that kinda defeats the point. Instead you have to use things like FlatPak or AppImages which covers most GUI apps you could want. For command line apps you will have to use something like DistroBox.
It's a trade off but for casual desktop users it is super stable and pretty simple. Updates come out daily (depending on distro) and they just get all their software from the software center app with a nice GUI.
(correct me if I'm wrong, I'm also new at this)
There are two partitions. One with the current system, one with the previous system. Updates are applied in a whole batch at once, once in a while.
Current system is cloned into the old one and an update is applied to the clone.
Once the update is complete, system reboots in the clone, and what was the current system becomes the previous one.
If something goes bad, you can reboot into the previous system and fix the clone.
The atomic distro would do a backup and if update goes wrong, it automatically boots back into the previous one.
I know its a meme but nixos is actually good for this. You can be on the unstable branch, not update for 5 years and still get everything working after updating(tho i dont recommend because of security). I think nixos has some fucking AMAZING features but the problem is its paired with features that make it extremely hard to use for a casual user.
So many Linux problems are solved by using NixOS, it's amazing. Immutability? NixOS. Atomic upgrades? NixOS. Whole system rollbacks? NixOS. Versionned system settings? NixOS. Impermanence? NixOS. Multiple versions of the same program installed at once? NixOS. Containers? NixOS. Multiple hardware profiles on a single installation? NixOS.
At this point, I think the only thing remaining is a Flatpak-like sandbox.
Agreed! I think a part of the "problem" is that with Nix, there's now at least 3 sides: application specific knowledge, system knowledge, and you have to use the nix language, architecture and tools to interface with it. so for a seasoned linux user, there's maybe just a new programming language, but if you're new to Linux, it's quickly gonna overwhelm you. which in a way is a bit ironic because I'd argue that it's easier to manage a NixOS system, and getting help is so much easier when your problems can be replicated by just aharing your config.
I've updated an Arch install after not being used for 2 years. I don't think there were any issues.
I've experienced far more issues upgrading to a new major release of an apt based distro though...
what did you do to that poor oldstable, you, you... monster!?!!?
That apt based distro was Ubuntu, wasn't it?
I never successfully upgraded that from one release to the next.I had success in upgrading a core ubuntu server with only apache and PHP installed … But I don’t think there is a less complicated ununtu install possible.
Then you were definitely lucky with the timeframe. Arch specifically sometimes has updates you need a recent version of pacman to even apply, which means you'll be left behind if you wait for too long. Last time was the switch to .zstd compressed packages: if you didn't have a pacman that supported them you had to manually go and find a pacman from the correct time frame plus all it's deps.
It's my experience that Ubuntu and Fedora break if you don't upgrade often (and then suddenly do after a year), while arch doesn't... Which is interesting, since it's supposed to be the other way around...
I think it's because Fedora and Ubuntu add a lot of new things, while arch just updates it's packages.
More please. Getting ready to switch from Windows to Linux, been making sure I can install all the -arr I want and get games running, but in Mint.
Now I'm hitting the brakes hard. It's Arch if that means I don't have this headache. I'll need to start over learning, but it'll be worth it.
As long as you update frequently (I do it whenever I think about it, usually once every few days to a week) you shouldn't run into any issues
I recently updated an old laptop from Ubuntu 16 to 24 with no issues whatsoever. Do not start with Arch if you don't have any Linux experience yet.
I've had two different arch based distros have issues when trying to update after long periods. I also had an Ubuntu server fail completely when doing a major version upgrade and had to restore it from backup. But then again I've also had no trouble updating an Ubuntu machine that was a couple years behind.
I'm on Fedora now for my desktop and it's been great so far, but I also do updates at least weekly. My advice would be if you expect to go months between updates your best choice is probably Debian.
Honestly if you are that worried about updates breaking stuff, you might be better off using an immutable distro. These work using images and/or snapshots so it's easy to rollback if something goes wrong. It's also just less likely to go wrong as you aren't upgrading individual packages as much, but rather the base system as a whole. Both Fedora and Open Suse have atomic/immutable variants with derivatives like Universal Blue providing ready to go setups for specific use cases like gaming and workstation use.
Alternatively the likes of Debian rarely break because of updates as everything is thoroughly tested before deployment. Gentoo and void are the same deal but in rolling release format so they are at least somewhat up to date while still being quite well tested.
Fedora upgrades are very reliable. I've never had one fail, 24 upgrades and counting.
Was gonna say this. As long as you run
dnf updatebefore you upgrade and make sure there aren't any left (you know, like their upgrade dpcs explicitly tell you to), you're chilling.Only issues I've had with fedora upgrades so far are plasma incompatibilities (not a fedora issue) and nvidia bullshit (not a fedora issue).
Eh, I leave fedora for a while and come back and it's fine. Never had it break and I've been using it consistently since like 27.
It's been an hour, I think OP didn't make it!!!!
Maybe I'm just screaming into the void here, but does it seem like, as a person who is still relatively out of touch with linux, I don't necessarily have to update my Arch distribution whenever there are new updates available? I could theoretically just go on downloading new programs, uninstalling old ones, using everything as it sits until theoretically something breaks?
You'll run into security and stability problems if you put it off for too long.
I don't necessarily have to update my Arch distribution whenever there are new updates available
Clearly, op agrees
You should always run a full upgrade when installing a new package to make sure your versions are all in sync. Like if your new package is looking for version 1.1 and you have 1.0 installed, the new package won't work. In general, everything should be installed with 'pacman -Syu' not just 'pacman -S'
If you don't install any new packages, then no you don't need to upgrade anything. You're just missing out on security patches and upgraded features. It's worth running occasional upgrades.
pacman -S without update is safe and will just install a version that was in the repos at the time you last dis an update. stuff gets removed from repos after like a month though..
Iirc, the Arch wiki says you should synchronize all packages while adding new ones, and it’s technically unsupported. It might work in some cases, but personally I didn’t have to do much to not be able to launch something because symbols missing in libraries or no such file altogether. To avoid problems it’s better to sync packages fully at least once in a while.
Op, it's been an entire day... How'd did it go?
I fear the worst
He's dead, Jim
2,409 updates could mean like two days of restarts... I'm just going to turn on some bagpipe music and stand on a hill in the wind looking out at the computer shaped clouds on the horizon.
Light the signal fires.
Snapper FTW
Seriously though. Snapper has saved my bacon so many times, I don't even know how I operated before it.
Legit my first thought too! This looks like my monthly update of Tumbleweed
Thoughts and prayers fren
And that is why I use Opensuse tumbleweed, no worries ever (zypper takes a snapshot before and after each upgrade, single command to roll back)
Not to mention that a two or three thousand package update is rookie numbers for zypper.
Basically reinstalling your OS because of an GCC update is the only gripe I have with Tumbleweed.
I wonder though, did I have the same with Arch? I don't remember.
Same sentiment but using Bazzite here.
Update fucked something? Roll back and wait. It’ll be fixed soon.
Praying for your computer, friend
@[email protected] it’s been 8 hours, did you make it?
He ded
He is in progress
We're getting things ready for you ( )
@[email protected] it's been almost 16hrs. Have you lost everything? Has your uncalculated gamble paid off?
Becareful with glibc
At that point I'd just backup my data and do a fresh install - would probably take less time too
I just tried updating my computer to Mint 22 and because I did a lot of tweaking to get VR running well it ended up uninstalling x11. I restored to backup and am now considering just doing a fresh install when 21 loses support instead lol.
That's why I have an alias that does an unattended update and then powers off. I run this every night.
Ayy same!
I mapped the script to a single key I wouldn’t otherwise use. When I’m done for the day I hit the key and leave.
Looks like glibc got another update
Do it!
Something i can say, did you have ready an snapshot of the system??, cuz too may things can go wrong with that numbre of updates.
If something like that happens, maybe the best option would be to just install a new fresh os lol
Troubleshooting everything that goes wrong will take my lifetime
The quick way
