Haven't booted this machine for a month or two... look at these updates! - eviltoast
  • beleza pura@lemmy.eco.br
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    people laughed at me for choosing debian. they asked why i chose to have ancient runes running in my computer

    who’s laughing now?

      • beleza pura@lemmy.eco.br
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        went looking for it. “stable rolling release” sounds really interesting, but i’m scared of installing it and being mistaken for a systemd hater

        • PushButton@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Yeah, systemd hater or not, runit is quite fabulous Imo.

          Some software with a hard requirement on systemd will not work, of course. I believe it is possible to run void using systemd, I’ve never tried though.

          I really like runit, but once it’s configured, like systemd, I mostly just don’t see it anymore - you know what I mean…

          Give it a shot, for me it’s the packaging system, take a look at it and at the github “void-repository”.

          I really like how it’s working, the simplicity of it, create your own package, your own repository, etc.

          The killer features, for me, isn’t really runit, but the stability of a rolling distro with the xbps package system.

  • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    1 day ago

    I have an Arch laptop that I didn’t update for 3.5 years. The system update took a while when I finally went through with it. Amazingly it didn’t break anything!

    • SunRed@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Yes, I am amazed that quite a few people in this thread are saying they ‘had to completely reinstall the os’ and that it broke everything after not much time. As long as one doesn’t rely on the AUR for system critical packages or much in generel, it is incredibly hard to break an Arch system (Manjaro and other Arch-based distros don’t count). This is due in part to Arch being quite reproducible but it also having very good maintainership.
      It doesn’t hurt to apply new package configs by going through pacdiff once in a while though.

      Edit: Typo

      • Fonzie!@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I ran a base-Arch with i3 before, I got tired of restoring backups and fixing things and went back to Debian. It broke too quickly by its defaults in my experience.

      • asqapro@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        21 hours ago

        I switched from Windows to EndeavourOS a few months ago and haven’t had any issues on my personal computer, it’s amazing.

        I also have EndeavourOS as a VM on my work laptop and I somehow managed to break systemd-boot when trying to do a system update though. The system update died halfway through and I defaulted to the classic solution of rebooting, which definitely made things worse because my boot partition in the VM broke. The great thing about Linux, and especially Arch, is the tools and knowledge readily available to fix things and everything was working again (with no data loss) in under 15 minutes. I’ve dealt with similar problems on Windows and either had to accept data loss or deal with significant headaches trying to resolve what should be a simple issue because the operating system refuses to provide basic information.

      • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        24 hours ago

        Manjaro and other Arch-based distros don’t count

        I think this has a lot to do with it. I have seen people say they use Arch before and then find out they’re using a derivative.

  • nomen_dubium@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    welp, looks like you don’t use python virtualenvs… well i guess jokes on you all your shit is probably broken now (and as a bonus, that’s probably a big part of the donwload size as well) :p

      • Atemu@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 days ago

        staging rebuild cycles only happen every two weeks or so.

        The reason is always that something changed and causes all dependent packages to change, requiring a rebuild of those too.

      • Fonzie!@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        It looks like it’s Debian’s logo in the bottom left and that that’s apt output.

        EDIT Nope, that’s pacman output, seems like they ssh’d into another arch-machine.

      • Sentau@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        Well in an immutable distro, there is little to no chance for the system to end up in an unusable state (I guess it is the same for distros which apply the updates atomically). Traditional distros are far more likely to bork when so much shit is updated at once

        • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 day ago

          I don’t think this is true. The package manager is there for a reason to prevent that. If you have more updates to install at a time, then the chances are the same as if you would have installed the problematic update one at a time. Just read the manual intervention information from Arch and see if there is something to do, then it won’t bork. If people don’t know what they are doing and do not read the additional information (that is required to do so on Arch), well yes, then you could end up borking your machine. But not because so many updates are installed at a time. The package manager and operating system and their maintainer designed it in a way that you can install ton of updates at a time without borking. This is fine.

          • Sentau@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Between this comment about arch and the other comment about opensuse, it must only be apt which has issues with large updates with complicated dependency chains. I remember 5-6 years ago Ubuntu borking itself when I tried to update after a decent gap and had 100+ packages to update. There is also the fact that people used to advice me to make a clean install in lieu of updating whenever a new version of Ubuntu dropped.

            • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              Before my switch, i used Ubuntu exclusively for 13 years in row. I always heard of problems (and not at least because of the PPA repositories) when upgrading from one major version to the next, be it a LTS or not. I never did that and always installed fresh because of these stories. Mostly 4 years in between, or sometimes 2.

              Its entirely possible that most problems happened because of packages from PPA that the user did not change for the new upgrade. Because PPA repositories were often designed for a specific version of Ubuntu. So its not entirely the fault of the apt package manager in that case.

              • superkret@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 day ago

                No, it’s just that Ubuntu never correctly upgrades between releases.
                I’ve tried so many times, and it basically always failed.

        • BCsven@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          As an anecdote (and not statistics) I have distro upgraded OpenSUSE with 5000 packages to install (thanks TeXlive LaTeX). It was fine.

    • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 day ago

      So you neglected the operating systems maintained regularly, despite it being a rolling release? I assume you didn’t read the manual intervention instructions that are posted regularly too. I don’t understand people using a rolling release and then not caring about the maintenance. Off course it won’t end very well.

      • onnekas@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        I’m using arch on my desktop for >5 years. Never read those instructions. Sometimes my update looks like OPs. Just hit Y. All fine.

        • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Then you were “lucky” (given you neglected this part for more than 5 years). Depending on what packages and configuration you have, you MUST do manual intervention to have a working and optimal system. While you were lucky, I wouldn’t recommend anyone to ignore the posts on https://archlinux.org/news/ , there are only couple of short posts per year, so not really a time waste.

  • pr06lefs@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    Recently updated a nixos machine that was on the shelf for five years or so. A few options and packages had been renamed, fixed those, upgrade completed with zero problems.

    • potentiallynotfelix@lemmy.fishOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Only issue with this update was a maintainer’s keyring had expired and been replaced, so his packages didn’t pass the signing check. After re-installing the keyring, the whole think works fine.

      • MyNameIsRichard@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        I used Tumbleweed for eight years with no problems. I only moved to EndeavourOS because Suse bared their corporate teeth and I got fed up being a couple of generations behind on the Nvidia drivers. EndeavourOS is also good.

      • WeAreAllOne@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Used tumbleweed for ages. No issues. Switched to slowroll again with no issues. Now trying fedora. All with Kde plasma.

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    Sometimes I wish someone would make a an Arch box and come back to it years later to see the updates it has missed.

    But that’s assuming an Arch box would be reliable enough to stay alive that long lol.

    Always heard of 20+ year old bsd and debian machines chugging along with no issue.

    • nous@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I have updated arch systems that had not been powered on for years before. It was fine. No issues what so ever. Arch is not some flaky distro that breaks if you look away for a minute. My main system has had had the same install for over 5 years now and I regularly forget to update it for months at a time. Again, no issues.

      • kautau@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah really the biggest issue I could see is pacman’s keyring being so out of date that it has to be manually refreshed with a new one

    • Ephera@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      It won’t rise much beyond that, since you only get one update per package. Whether it’s upgrading Firefox from version 120 to 121 or to version 130, it doesn’t change much in terms of download size, nor the number of updates.

      At least, I assume, Arch doesn’t do differential updates. On some of the slower-moving distributions, they only make you download the actual changes to the files within the packages. In that case, jumping to 121 vs. 130 would make more of a difference.

      If you do want lots of package updates, you need lots of packages. The texlive-full package is always a fun one in that regard…

    • Tekhne@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      I had that on a physical machine! It broke hardcore lol I had to reinstall the OS after trying to update

      • superkret@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yes, you can. You can even update Arch after a year. But you’ll have to do a few more steps than just pacman -Syu