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

341–350 of 422 posts

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#341

Post by lostmsu »

rodolphoarruda wrote: post #57

> "With Ubuntu, I would’ve had to upgrade (...) five times to end up with the latest LTS release.* And these release upgrades don’t always go smoothly either." I read this in the exact moment I was upgrading to 22.04.1 end it stopped due to lack of space in /boot. A rare case of synchronicity in my life.

Ah, lack of space in /boot, the "bye-bye regular user" issue that was finally solved for apt upgrade some time in 201x, but apparently nobody bothered to ensure it does not happen in dist-upgrade. The year of Linux Desktop is just one decade away now.

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#342

Post by seba_dos1 »

jcelerier wrote: post #93
wooque wrote: post #90

>my experience doesn’t match the common notion that Arch Linux is unstable Arch is unstable, as in, package versions constantly change and can (will) introduce bugs and regressions. Debian is considered stable because apart from security updates package versions are set in stone til the next release, so there won't be any surprises. This is stable/unstable difference, that doesn't mean that you can't break your OS an…

> Debian is considered stable because apart from security updates package versions are set in stone til the next release, so there won't be any surprises. which is not what the rest of the world means by "stable" when talking about software, so there is in practice a lot of surprise for users coming to Debian when they hear "stable" thinking that it means "no bugs" when it actually means "no changes"

> which is not what the rest of the world means by "stable" when talking about software

[citation needed]

That's exactly what a lot of software projects mean when they make stable release branches, stable interfaces, stable protocols...

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#343

Post by meribold »

3np wrote: post #338
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…

My first significant Arch install was also pretty long-lived (not 10y but def >5) Did you go straight to full-on systemd when you installed it? Arch was transitioning to systemd by default around the time of your initial installation (default since Oct 2012 so you would have just missed it if you went with defaults). Mine was a few years of cruft-accumulation in already and my init system understanding was not super…

I switched this installation to systemd after about two months with sysvinit, but the switch was quite painless.

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#344

Post by 3np »

meribold wrote: post #343
3np wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My first significant Arch install was also pretty long-lived (not 10y but def >5) Did you go straight to full-on systemd when you installed it? Arch was transitioning to systemd by default around the time of your initial installation (default since Oct 2012 so you would have just missed it if you went with defaults). Mine was a few years of cruft-accumulation in already and my init system understanding was not super…

I switched this installation to systemd after about two months with sysvinit, but the switch was quite painless.

I'd guess a couple of years prior of sometimes blindly messing around with random packages and configuration made the difference (:

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#345

Post by asveikau »

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?

I remember libc5 to libc6 as a late 90s thing.

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#346

Post by bombcar »

chlorion wrote: post #325
bombcar wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Are they actually? Have you spent any time in the Gentoo community or talked to actual Gentoo users? I see people parrot this around a lot but from my experience the insufferable thing is the constant complaining and sweeping accusations against a large and varied group of people who happen to use a certain distro.

The point is they're not as insufferable as made out - but there is a reason for the stereotype, for sure.

Though much of that may have been taken over by the Archies, I've not fought in the distro wars for years now.

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#347

Post by matheusmoreira »

wing-_-nuts wrote: post #73
5e92cb50239222b wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Arch isn't some small LFS niche distro anymore. At a certain point, you have to embrace at least some small amount of usability, or at least not reject PRs to add it. I found it quite embarrassing when one of the most popular distros out there had a worse installer than deb or slack from 20 years ago. That's not 'oops we forgot', it's not 'it was never really a priority' that's blatant user hostile elitism.

> that's blatant user hostile elitism

A small amount of elitism is okay. For example, the Arch Wiki requires users to run a simple command before it allows them to create an account:

  pacman -V|base32|head -1
That command more or less proves the user has successfully installed Arch Linux. People who can't provide that output probably shouldn't be editing the wiki. I realize it's nowhere near a perfect proof but it's probably fine for the wiki's purposes.

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#348

Post by matheusmoreira »

maxnoe wrote: post #111
dj_mc_merlin wrote: post #36

The best thing about the rolling releases is that the OS feels ageless. If I leave a Thinkpad sitting in a corner for 3 years and boot it up again to pacman -Syu, it will have basically the same software as my modern Thinkpad. This just tickles my sense of "this is how the computer _should_ behave".

I would be very surprised if pacman -Syu worked after three years of no upgrades. That's generally not supported and will require manual interactions.

It works well, at least for me. I haven't updated mine for many months.

If I have problems during the process, it's almost always a signing keys problem. Package verification fails because too much time's passed between updates: the keys stored on my computer are too old and don't work anymore. I made a script to refresh the keys and everything started working perfectly.

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#349

Post by pabs3 »

idoubtit wrote: post #88

I'm a happy user of another rolling release distribution: Debian testing. It's on my desktop and a laptop for a decade (even more for the desktop since I transferred the OS from my previous desktop pc). I can't remember any problem during the upgrades of the recent years. I often apply partial updates through `aptitude` on a weekly basis, and full upgrades once in a while (maybe monthly). There were some rough times…

Me too! I do unattended-upgrades 4 times daily. I also auto-upgrade packages to unstable when there are security updates that didn't reach testing yet.

https://wiki.debian.org/DebianTesting#Best_practices_for_Tes...

Re: Using the same Arch Linux installation for a decade

#350

Post by pabs3 »

vbernat wrote: post #145
idoubtit wrote: post #88

I'm a happy user of another rolling release distribution: Debian testing. It's on my desktop and a laptop for a decade (even more for the desktop since I transferred the OS from my previous desktop pc). I can't remember any problem during the upgrades of the recent years. I often apply partial updates through `aptitude` on a weekly basis, and full upgrades once in a while (maybe monthly). There were some rough times…

Another Debian unstable user. It's hard to remember the exact installation date, but I have a `/var/log/firewalld.1` from Aug 25 2002. So, 20 years soon! And it has been migrated from 32-bit to 64-bit.

If you used d-i to install, it would have left logs in /var/log/installer/

Also, the installation-birthday package can figure out your installation's birthday.

Post reply on HN