Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

meribold.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 422 posts

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#281

Post by trashburger »

burntsushi wrote: post #191
TacticalCoder wrote: post #134

I always reinstall from scratch although I could just Debian "dist upgrade". My thinking is this: if, ten years ago, I somehow missed a security patch or some 0-day owned my machine before it was patched, then I'd potentially have been copying / dd'ing / rsync'ing a rootkit for ten years. By installing from scratch at every new stable (or unstable) release, I get rid of a lot of potential security issues. Now as an a…

This is the best I've got, almost 2 years: $ w 15:25 up 725 days, 6:06, 1 user, load averages: 1.31 1.21 1.30 USER TTY FROM LOGIN@ IDLE WHAT andrew s000 192.168.1.200 15:25 - w But! This is a system in my office at home. Not in a data center somewhere.

Is that plugged to a UPS or is your power just that stable?

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#282

Post by xvedejas »

fonkyyack wrote: post #146
meribold wrote: post #35

I can provide some details regarding the times things did break that I mentioned in the article. * In September 2014, X broke, and I created an `/etc/X11/Xwrapper.config` file with the lines `allowed_users = anybody` and `needs_root_rights = yes` to get it to work again. I don't remember and don't have notes on why that helped. It sure does sound like a pretty terrible hack. I don't have that Xwrapper.config file any…

I had the exact same problems you mentioned! Also, Nvidia gpu drivers are the worst (I was on Manjaro back then) to seeif I could get rid of Windows for gaming purposes. I used Linux for games for about 6 months and had to quit and get back to Windows. I should retry now with all the steam deck fuss!

Proton is a game-changer, but Nvidia drivers remain the most unstable thing on Arch. Find a version that works well with your card, and avoid upgrading it, if at all possible. It's performant, but I have games that crash once every few hours, but only specifically on certain machines.

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#283

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

cevn wrote: post #199
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I tried to use Centos long term, that was a disaster. What was a disaster about it? I would expect pain crossing major versions, but you could plausibly have installed CentOS on a machine and just stayed there for 5-10 years with nothing more than the odd `yum update && reboot` and I would have thought it would be fine.

After a while I believe there were no more updates for Centos 7. What is impressive about this story is that I was able to drag it into the modern era with rocky linux 9 but it was a ... rocky transition. My biggest pain point was when the networking stack was broken and Yum refuses to do ANYTHING without loading sources from the network. I couldn't get around it without flash driving RPMs to the server.. The uptime…

CentOS 7 "active support" ended in 2020 (which I'm guessing is what you mean?) but it's supposed to keep getting security support until 2024 (thus hilariously outliving both CentOS 8 and CentOS Stream 8) - https://endoflife.date/centos

Although certainly I can sympathize with the software eventually getting very long in the tooth, and jumping EL 7 to 9 could definitely be quite a change.

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#284

Post by girvo »

5e92cb50239222b wrote: post #49
wing-_-nuts wrote: post #34

I recently switched to an arch flavor because the AUR had a lot of little small utilities that make life better on wayland. Also, it's quite easy to install the latest version of golang and rust, etc. Pros: Documentation is excellent. Better than even Gentoo or Ubuntu's docs. Cons: Arch doesn't have an installer, and seems almost militantly against providing one, or a lot of other little utilities that could improve…

I think you misunderstood the point of the distribution. There's no installer because Arch developers have no need of one. They're creating the distribution for themselves, and if you find it useful (I do), that's great. There's no expectation that an "average technically literate joe" is going to use it because he's not in its target group.

Except there is an installer now, so your arguments against it are moot.

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#285

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

jandrese wrote: post #215
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I tried to use Centos long term, that was a disaster. What was a disaster about it? I would expect pain crossing major versions, but you could plausibly have installed CentOS on a machine and just stayed there for 5-10 years with nothing more than the odd `yum update && reboot` and I would have thought it would be fine.

Usually the pain comes when you find you need to use a feature in some software and the feature wasn't introduced until after the version that Centos ships. This happens more often than you might expect. Even fairly "modern" versions of Centos come with some really old and crusty packages.

Yeah, that's fair. I guess I was reading it as a complaint that the existing system had issues, but EL certainly has a painful tendency to not keep up with new stuff (which is rather the point, but that doesn't make it not painful:])

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#286

Post by cycomanic »

LukeShu wrote: post #231
cycomanic wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The glibc upgrade which was painful (and essentially required recompiling everything) was much further back than 10 years. I think I was running LFS at the time, but recall it was painful for all distros. I don't think there was a glibc upgrade that was disruptive since then. There was the introduction of multi arch on Debian some years back which caused a bit of disruption (I was running Debian unstable at the time…

In Arch, the glibc package upgrade associated with the `/lib` + `/usr/lib` merge in 2012ish was painful. I assume that's what the parent post was referring to. I assume you're referring to the libc5→libc6 upgrade?

Yes I think you're correct libc5 to libc6 is the upgrade I was talking about. I just had a look that's more than 20 years ago. Funny how people still talk about "painful libc upgrades".

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#287

Post by thekoma »

capableweb wrote: post #273
oedo wrote: post #194

Yeah, this is a thing. To enjoy years of stability on Arch[0]: - occasionally upgrade your system - before upgrading, glance at https://archlinux.org/news/ to see if anything requires manual intervention [0] I use Arch btw

> - before upgrading, glance at https://archlinux.org/news/ to see if anything requires manual intervention I simply have https://archlinux.org/ as my homepage when I open my browser on the desktop computer. Shows the same news in a slightly better format (personally), and also shows latest package updates on the right side, in case some favorite software of mine has been recently updated.

I've been using informant (https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/informant).

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#288

Post by ddggdd »

I bought a samsung np900x3g about 5 years ago for the reason it's too cheap and put archlinux on it. then I used it as my main computer, bought 2 ryzen rtx gaming laptop since then, but only use them to play some games. it's a 8 years old computer and I suspect with arch I can use it for at least several years more, and I doubt any people here is still rocking a i5-4200u , but it work perfectly for me.

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#289

Post by TacticalCoder »

burntsushi wrote: post #191
TacticalCoder wrote: post #134

I always reinstall from scratch although I could just Debian "dist upgrade". My thinking is this: if, ten years ago, I somehow missed a security patch or some 0-day owned my machine before it was patched, then I'd potentially have been copying / dd'ing / rsync'ing a rootkit for ten years. By installing from scratch at every new stable (or unstable) release, I get rid of a lot of potential security issues. Now as an a…

This is the best I've got, almost 2 years: $ w 15:25 up 725 days, 6:06, 1 user, load averages: 1.31 1.21 1.30 USER TTY FROM LOGIN@ IDLE WHAT andrew s000 192.168.1.200 15:25 - w But! This is a system in my office at home. Not in a data center somewhere.

Coming from the author of ripgrep, which is a tool I use daily, I've got to say it's an honor to see you answering my silly comment!

Office at home certainly beats datacenter hosted but by 5x? Not sure... ; )

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#290

Post by jmnicolas »

burntsushi wrote: post #191
TacticalCoder wrote: post #134

I always reinstall from scratch although I could just Debian "dist upgrade". My thinking is this: if, ten years ago, I somehow missed a security patch or some 0-day owned my machine before it was patched, then I'd potentially have been copying / dd'ing / rsync'ing a rootkit for ten years. By installing from scratch at every new stable (or unstable) release, I get rid of a lot of potential security issues. Now as an a…

This is the best I've got, almost 2 years: $ w 15:25 up 725 days, 6:06, 1 user, load averages: 1.31 1.21 1.30 USER TTY FROM LOGIN@ IDLE WHAT andrew s000 192.168.1.200 15:25 - w But! This is a system in my office at home. Not in a data center somewhere.

Don't you need to reboot after kernel updates?
Post reply on HN