Why You Should Use Tumbleweed

Post by rbrownsuse » Tue, Mar 29, 2016, 10:59 PM UTC

toyg wrote: post #9

placeybordeaux wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a rolling release, that means each time a new version of a package is available they will try and incorporate it. Apparently the difference they have to gentoo, arch et al is that they have a large CI that actually inspects screen shots to verify that the new package didn't break anything. I run antergos (arch based) at home, having the bleeding edge is nice, but the AUR is really what seals the deal for me. Th…

CI tests as described are very good for minor patches, but new features and significant UI changes seem to require significant manual updates to tests anyway.

Post by semi-extrinsic » Tue, Mar 29, 2016, 11:07 PM UTC

rbrownsuse wrote: post #10

dbcurtis wrote: post #6

Seems like a step forward in solving the "stale versus reliable" conundrum. Over the years I've repeatedly been irked by how stale the package repositories are in some distros. At the fresh end of the spectrum, I used Gentoo for a while, and I do like many things about Gentoo, but I came to the conclusion that it is essentially impossible to QA Gentoo. Plus, falling behind in Gentoo opens you to a world of hurt tryin…

zypper takes care of most of that for us - it really is an exceptional package manager We have some tests in openQA that keep an eye on upgrades, as well as some users who like to stagger their Tumbleweed updates for some weeks. I think the record I heard was like 3 months (and our gcc5 migration happened during those months), and then they upgraded with no problem

Post by rbrownsuse » Tue, Mar 29, 2016, 11:14 PM UTC

waynecochran wrote: post #14

So for every library Foo, it tracks all of the packages that depend on Foo? What if I add my own package -- do I have to tell Foo about mine as well? What if Foo's API changed or breaks my package?

Post by rbrownsuse » Tue, Mar 29, 2016, 11:16 PM UTC

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #13

rbrownsuse wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

zypper takes care of most of that for us - it really is an exceptional package manager We have some tests in openQA that keep an eye on upgrades, as well as some users who like to stagger their Tumbleweed updates for some weeks. I think the record I heard was like 3 months (and our gcc5 migration happened during those months), and then they upgraded with no problem

3 months? That's peanuts. Having too many Arch boxes, back in '12/'13 I had one that was 9 months behind, with the big filesystem movearound and sysvinit->systemd change happening in that period. It took a couple of hours of work, but the upgrade went through fine in the end. I'd suggest you do automated testing of at least 6 month old system upgrades. Because users are going to do it, and much complaining will ensue…

Post by vmorgulis » Tue, Mar 29, 2016, 11:29 PM UTC

    x11_start_program("firefox https://html5test.com/index.html", 6, {valid => 1});

    # makes firefox as default browser

    if (check_screen('firefox_default_browser')) {
        assert_and_click 'firefox_default_browser_yes';
    }