292
Realizing Arch isn't for me after updating broke VLC
(lemmy.sdf.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2025
292 points (100.0% liked)
Linux
56798 readers
501 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
You have to watch the factory mailing list and make any manual interventions for Tumbleweed, and frankly, you should be watching the news and taking any action required no matter the os.
A decent daily driver distro for regular user should not break on blind update - at most, it should warn the user automatically before applying updates. If user is expected to check news every time they want to update their system - it is not a good fit for anyone but enthusiasts.
Where did you get the idea that Arch is a daily driver for regular user? The very distro that tells in big letters: stuff can break, you better watch out on updates? The very distro that has command-line install process with chroot-like commands as official one?
Plenty of people seriously propose it as such.
It is not - at least if you're not an enthusiast happy to tinker with your system all the time.
Yup, it really is not. Those plenty of people are doing a big disservice to others with such proposing. I am sad to hear it
There are distros based on Arch that are proclaimed to be user friendly and ready for general desktop/gaming use. Plus plenty of people online tell others to use Arch as a daily driver.
Regardless I don't think an update should happen if it's going to break something, unless you manually over ride the warnings it should be showing.
Well, Arch wiki explicitly tells you are expected to read the page before doing an update. Those distros which claim to be user-friendly as in "we treat you with kids gloves" definitely should take care of this, no questions here
Anyone who is not curious enough to type
yay -Pwbefore typingyayshould probably stick with something like Windows. And even then, you should watch out for the rare manual intervention.Edit: Tone.
I don't think it makes sense to gatekeep Linux only to those who has time, energy, and dedication to continuously check for necessary interventions and to familiarize themselves with all the terminal utilities in the first place.
That is a sort of elitism we need to carefully avoid - one, because otherwise it would halven the desktop Linux community, and two, because there's a huge group of people out there who need what Linux offers, but cannot dedicate themselves to it in the way enthusiasts do.
For them, there must be an option to push the button and get a smooth update, with everything resolved automatically or prompted in a user-friendly way. Arch is not that.
You feel comfy doing this - alright, no one stops you, Arch is great and has a purpose. But we should never put blame on users for not using their system The Arch Way™, because it's too technical, too engaged, and is just a poor fit for most. People will not and should not accommodate for this just to use their system. There's no need to.
If someone chose Arch and complains that it breaks things, it could be useful to point out Arch doesn't have required guardrails to make it operable in a way they expect, and direct the user to other distributions that have them and potentially least painful ways to migrate.
Having tried Arch and its derivatives, and recognizing their strong points, I can absolutely tell the person needs another distribution, and that's alright! Whatever fits anybody is up to them. And for stable rolling release experience without the need for manual checking (but also without some of the power features of Arch mainly geared toward enthusiasts) there's OpenSUSE Tumbleweed.
Edit: Tone.
I don't use Arch, I use Endeavour because they took Arch and made it better. As to why I used yay as my example, there are two reasons:
I see!
I do, in fact, use Endeavour on my desktop as well, simply because I like snappiness and choice of Arch and similarly don't wanna bother with the pure one (and also EndeavourOS forums are more friendly in my experience). I run OpenSUSE Slowroll (an experimental Tumbleweed build, same idea as Manjaro, but actually done right) on my other laptop, so can speak from the experience on both ends.
With Slowroll (and my gf's Tumbleweed) I've only once faced the need for manual intervention, and it was simply to resolve a dependency change by choosing which package to leave - literally enter one number, and then it went on peacefully and correctly installing 1460 updates (yeah, they pushed a big Tumbleweed dump, 3.5 gigs total). On Arch and EndeavourOS, the last intervention was just recently, that's the one OP talks about, and they do happen more often and are more complicated than I'd like.
I used Tumbleweed for eight or so years before switching to Endeavour and it only really bit me hard once. Update, reboot, and sudo no longer worked! If I had spent a bit more time going through the mailing list, I could have made a simple configuration change before rebooting and saved a lot of stress! It affected nearly everybody who installed that particular image.
I'd say one issue in 8 years is a stellar track record!
But I agree they should have warned users a better way.
Anyway, I like how btrfs is treated within Tumbleweed - snapper is fully configured and enabled by default, and you can load a snapshot and rollback into it from the boot menu - all that would take you less than a minute, and any faulty update will be gone for good. With ext4, though, you might need Timeshift. But then, all that can be done within Arch with just a few more tweaks!
Yeah, it's a pretty good track record. It was definitely a failure of communication in that instance, but iirc, they ended up rolling the change back a couple of days later.
I have been using Arch, EndouvourOS, and Chimera Linux now for years.
I never do this.
As I have been a Linux user since the early 90’s, I don’t think Windows is really the right fall-back for me.
This is not really true for fixed release distros. I can’t remember when was the last time I had to read through the release note before Ubuntu version upgrade, or upgrading any package.
I used to think that, then I learnt the truth. Now-a-days, I say that you may as well use a rolling release because it's not really any more work that a fixed release and you have up to date software.
Just to reiterate the same point - in fixed release, a package version is not released until all known issues are resolved.
At no point, it is end user responsibility to bother checking anything before installing a new version.
Oh yes, the most mythical of software. Bug free.
Bugs are of two types - known (found during testing by Distro maintainer) and unknown.
Fixed release fixes known bugs before pushing packages.
It is following the standard development life cycle.
So do rolling releases. What's your point?
Are you familiar with the term "Regression testing"?
That's not really true. It's more important that the issues are known. Sometimes they actually wait longer to fix issues since it would introduce changes
My bad, I meant "known major issues". If minor issues are not fixed, they document it on release note. But, at no point any fixed release distro ever released breaking changes "knowingly".
Well… not really. My current installation of Tumbleweed is three and a half years old, and back in 2022 the only reason I re-installed it was changing the NVMe drive. I’ve never read factory mailing list and don’t ever recall having made manual interventions. I’ve just booted it, updated (zypper ref; zypper dup), rebooted and continued working.
You can do this on Arch too and it will work great until it doesn't. Manual interventions are rare and usually don't affect everyone.