Thread 106278559

Is it true that Arch Linux practically requires you to run "sudo pacman -Syu" at least once a week in order for your computer to not ACK itself? Is there a distro that doesn't use ancient packages but doesn't also require constant weekly updates? Why is Linux so shitty?

It's a rolling release distro. This means there are rapid changes. They test patches between close versions but not far versions, so if you miss too many updates you're more likely to encounter a breaking bug.
The solution is to not run a rolling release distro.

>>106278559 (OP)
It’s not true, no. You update whenever and whatever tf you want, it’s your right and responsibility.

>>106278559 (OP)
>Is it true that Arch Linux practically requires you to run "sudo pacman -Syu" at least once a week in order for your computer to not ACK itself?
No. I've got arch on my laptop which I use maybe 2-3 times a year. It works just fine. I've had one dependency issue that I had to manually fix in all that time, and that same issue happened on my main PC that I updated regularly.
>Why is Linux so shitty?
Because you don't read what the terminal puts out and copy paste commands from random websites and AI.
If you just read the terminal it's really simple to use. But you also don't have to, if you don't like it, just don't use it. Stay with windows for all I care.
"We're punished by our sins nor for them" and all that.

>>106278603
I don't know what you're babbling about. Every newbie Arch tutorial I watched or read said that, in order to ensure your PC stays stable, you need to do weekly updates. I'm just wondering if that's actually true since constant updates is one of the things that I despise about Windows.

>>106278621
>Every newbie Arch tutorial I watched or read said that, in order to ensure your PC stays stable, you need to do weekly updates.
Cool, listen to them then instead of me.
>I'm just wondering if that's actually true since constant updates is one of the things that I despise about Windows.
For further information, please re-read the previous post.

>>106278559 (OP)
Minako is for naka'ing those dashi's.

>>106278559 (OP)
no. you don't have to update your computer. why are you so retarded? anyway, the answer to your question is probably fedora or something. maybe opensuse leap

>>106278559 (OP)
>Why is Linux so shitty?
Perpetually in beta.

I installed gentoo one time and the thing literally randomly broke the next day. Didn't even run any updates. It just died.

>>106278559 (OP)
Fedora might be good for you. I use Tumbleweed and I'm not planning to switch. It's the perfect distro for me.

no

>>106278559 (OP)
>Is there a distro that doesn't use ancient packages but doesn't also require constant weekly updates?
you are looking for Fedora, or maybe even the non-LTS Ubuntu

>>106280413
it doesnt have ancient packages like debian but its point release nature is cancer

>>106278559 (OP)
>Why is Linux so shitty?
Look, Arch just isn't for you then, and that's okay. Just use Debian or Ubuntu LTS

>>106278559 (OP)
Arch is just Fedora with a different package manager. Which is why all the retards here love it because it's easy to install but makes them feel like super haxxor because they ran a couple of commands from tty instead of using a GUI.

Arch is shit. Every package is a bloated piece of shit that bundles in everything by default. It is in no way "minimal". Even the retards running dwm or some wayland clone abomination of it aren't running a "minimal" system. They praise shit like pipewire which emulates 3 different sound servers and eats up mountains of RAM doing nothing but idling. The kernel is bloated as fuck because it bundles in everything just like the packages. They brag about "closely following upstream" because that means they don't have to do any work. They just let big tech shit whatever down their throats like systemd and they say thanks and ask for more. It's basically just a way to beta test for IBM using a worse package manager.

As a whole Linux is pretty shit these days but if you want to run it at least have some self respect and use something like Gentoo. At least with it you can avoid some of the cancer and have a true "minimal" system. Most everything else is garbage. Litmus test boils down to: Does it bundle systemd as the default init? Then it's garbage. Does it use pipewire? garbage. Does it brag about using shit like wayland or anything else IBM and Red Hat is shitting out? Garbage. Is its claim to fame shoving shit into over 9,000 containers for "security"? Garbage. Do you have to learn some faggy language to use the package manager that isn't useful for anything else? Garbage.

That leaves you with: Gentoo, Guix System, and LFS for the most part. Which both of them already being brought into the cancer fold fast so you're going to have to do a bunch of work to unfuck them.

TL:DR: Run one of the BSDs instead.

>>106281807
but lennart poettering is based as hell and you cannot change my mind.

>>106281807
hi axon

>>106278603
>No. I've got arch on my laptop which I use maybe 2-3 times a year. It works just fine. I've had one dependency issue that I had to manually fix in all that time, and that same issue happened on my main PC that I updated regularly.
So it doesn't work just fine, then.

>>106281846
>maybe that's not the goal of Arch

>>106278559 (OP)
You got that backwards baka, it's updates that risk breaking shit, not abstaining from them

>>106278559 (OP)
>Is it true that Arch Linux practically requires you to run "sudo pacman -Syu" at least once a week in order for your computer to not ACK itself?
No
>Is there a distro that doesn't use ancient packages but doesn't also require constant weekly updates?
Yes. See above.
>Why is Linux so shitty?
too many winshitters ruined it

>>106281807
>Arch is just Fedora with a different package manager.
Winshitters consider this "insightful"
>Every package is a bloated piece of shit that bundles in everything by default.
you know you can buy more ram for 20 bucks, right?
>eats up mountains of RAM doing nothing but idling.
if 10 megs is "mountains"
>They brag about "closely following upstream" because that means they don't have to do any work.
I don't want some distro jannie tinkering with my packages. No improvements, and many rces, have ever been made by a tinkering "maintainer".

The days of my linux server has been running my email for 30 years (without any updates or restarts) are long over. Now if you do that you should expect your emails to be public domain.

Is there any risk to cronning a script that just runs -pacman -Syu on every boot?
>yeah your system might break
okay but doing it manually would have prevented that?

>>106282038
>can't argue against any points
>JUST BUY MORE RAM BRO
Yeah I'm a "winshitter" because I know more about the state of modern Linux than you. Not like I've been using it since the mid-90s and was there to see the shittification or anything.

Linux was ruined by people like YOU because you wanted a Windows clone. Well congrats. That's exactly what you got.
>pipewire only consumes 10MB of RAM
More like 100MB on a good day. Seen as high at 500MB while it's doing nothing. Meanwhile, on sndio, OSS and everything else the sound server barely uses 1MB of RAM even under load and we don't have to support 3+ different standards because it isn't coded by retards. There was no point in making pipewire, pulse or even ALSA. It only exists because Linux users are fucking retards willing to allow malware on their systems. It's 2025 AND THEY STILL CAN'T GET AUDIO RIGHT despite being gifted OSS and sndio years ago. Both work just fine on Linux and all you have to do is compile support for your packages. But I guess you can't. Since you run Arch and have no idea how your OS actually works.
>distro janny tinker tranny
Strange way to say you prefer getting your glow nigger software directly from the source. If you had actual developers still you wouldn't be using garbage in the first place.

>>106282077
>Is there any risk to cronning a script that just runs -pacman -Syu on every boot?
Yes. Your system will refuse to boot in 2 weeks. Then when you complain about it they'll shame you for not reading a forum post.

This is why you should use a real OS where the system tools don't break the system randomly and where man pages are actually good.

It's a garbage distro. Just like most Linux distros. Don't expect to get good advice here. These fags will accept all manner of malware on their machines as long as they can play AAA video games on them. They have no idea what they're doing. They can't write code. They can't read code.

I use Arch and update twice a day.

>>106282116
>Then when you complain about it they'll shame you for not reading a forum post.
they should develop some traffic light protocol right on the homepage or the wiki
>green is g2g
>yellow is possible trouble afoot, make sure 2 read
>red is big problem, do not update

>>106278559 (OP)
>Is it true that Arch Linux practically requires you to run "sudo pacman -Syu" at least once a week in order for your computer to not ACK itself?

>>106278559 (OP)
Yes, and also sometimes updates require manual intervention, i.e. you have to go to the forums and scroll through the replies saying "ummm didn't you read this announcement???" (as if I should be subscribed to a newsletter for the fucking os updates) and find the reply pasting the command to fix it.

>>106278559 (OP)
Ubuntu

>>106278559 (OP)
Kinda true but see it more as a best practice and not something you must absolutely do. If you update once in a few months it will still be just fine.

>>106278559 (OP)
>>106278585
Is there a way to update to the versions that were current as of a particular date, rather than directly to the current versions?
Let's say I have an Arch install that hasn't been updated since 2023. Instead of updating it to the current versions of everything in one go, could I essentially apply updates a month at a time?

>>106278559 (OP)
I -Syu once every month or two. I think the longest I went between updates was 6 months. I'm pretty sure they fixed the keyring thing that was apparently causing these issues, though I don't remember encountering those myself.

>>106278559 (OP)
>arch linux
BEAGAHAHAHAH

>>106283276
no

>>106278559 (OP)
That never happened to me, and some times it's been months without me updating.
Of course, the longer it takes, the higher the chance of a breaking change, but usually it's things you solve in five minutes.

I run it maybe once in one or two months

The worst that's happened to me is I had to reset and redownload the keyring because they rotated a bunch of keys

Why does all the software have to be in sync anyway? What's the problem with having multiple versions of the same package?

>>106278559 (OP)
>Is it true that Arch Linux practically requires you to run "sudo pacman -Syu" at least once a week in order for your computer to not ACK itself?
no, it's not true

>>106278621
>constant updates is one of the things that I despise about Windows.
don't compare updates in windows to updates in linux

>>106278559 (OP)
I update maybe every six months and rarely have issues. Sometimes when I install a new package I have to use sudo pacman -Sy first to update the repo stuff.

>>106278559 (OP)
more like 5 times a day lol

>>106278621
If your system is stable, updating can only make it less stable. You update if it isn't stable or you need the new packages.

>>106287084
you update so you get latest features for whatever. say for gpu driver, or whatever else you need

>>106287095
That's what I said. Though that doesn't mean your system will stay stable. Updates are always a risk. On windows too.

>>106278559 (OP)
Why would you use a rolling release distro and not keep it relatively up to date? Isn't the whole reason to use arch to get the latest drivers and features? Necessarily, less testing is done before they push these out into the repositories, so you have to accept that certain edge cases like upgrading from version 1.01010 of a software to 1.1010. Its the trade off inherent in something like arch.
Just use Debian if you don't care about having shiny new GPU drivers. You can even do the minimal install and copy-paste commands from reddit to configure x11/wayland manually for the hecking minimal rice.

>>106287244
The reasons to use arch is 1) it's easy to use and 2) it's highly customizable without being a huge time sink like Gentoo (which has way better customisation, but also requires more time to setup).
Debian is much harder to use.

>>106287272
>Debian is harder to use than arch
I'm curious what your reasoning is, because I've had a pretty easy time with Debian and, while Arch isn't that hard, it's a little more involved to install and maintain.
You're definitely right about customization being a big draw.

>>106287305
On arch everything is well documented so if you have a problem, like I had hardware related ones.. it was literally in the arch wiki. Don't have to use ai slop or Google.

>>106287313
most if not all of what you read about on the arch wiki is 1-1 applicable to debian. not to mention there's a debian wiki as well if you really feel like opening up a web browser instead of just using the man pages.

>>106278559 (OP)
No there is not because what you brainrotten zoomers call ancient is the stable software you are looking for but for some reason you want to use unstable software and then complain that it's unstable yet you can't even name a single feature you would be missing with the "ancient" software

>>106287449
Yeah I dunno about that, I even noticed pretty drastic differences on EndeavourOS. Also, none of the stuff I am talking about is in the man pages.
One of my issues was solved by a later release of the 6.15 kernel and one of them was a chip ID override.

>>106287040
>sudo pacman -Syu
>pacman shits itself.
>System breaks.

>>106278559 (OP)
it's called NixOS
all the entire packages are compatible with each other which are fixed at a certain revision
as opposed to normal distros where each package can be updated alone and as a consequence it will run into error as its dependendies are outdated

>>106278559 (OP)
If that were the case you could just write a script.

>>106288390
pacman would always break my Nvidia drivers.