Rolling Linux versus Windows updates?

[AsPeeXXXVIII]

rolling means you have newer libs but its potential unsafe, this can also break the system or apps will not work if updates for apps are late

Funny thing is I see this being said a lot, but I've been using rolling-release Linux distros for 2+ years on my computers at this point - including daily driving one on my main PC for ~4 months - and haven't had an update noticeably break anything in all that time. It's mostly partial updates that more so have the chance to break something in your system.

[Grizzellda]

Thanx for all your posts guys, I think we really need to keep talking about this stuff, stay current.

[audiojunkie]

rolling means you have newer libs but its potential unsafe, this can also break the system or apps will not work if updates for apps are late

Funny thing is I see this being said a lot, but I've been using rolling-release Linux distros for 2+ years on my computers at this point - including daily driving one on my main PC for ~4 months - and haven't had an update noticeably break anything in all that time. It's mostly partial updates that more so have the chance to break something in your system.

Which distro do you use?

[NWSM]

rolling means you have newer libs but its potential unsafe, this can also break the system or apps will not work if updates for apps are late

Funny thing is I see this being said a lot, but I've been using rolling-release Linux distros for 2+ years on my computers at this point - including daily driving one on my main PC for ~4 months - and haven't had an update noticeably break anything in all that time. It's mostly partial updates that more so have the chance to break something in your system.

As a beginner, I was advised to stay away from rolling releases, so I went with Debian’s stability instead. The potential problem lies in the way updates are reviewed and released on Arch (Well Linux isn't just Linux) — it usually happens quite fast, and that’s not always a good thing, if you dont know kinda Pro on Linux. Of course, I couldn’t really test that myself, and comparing it to Windows doesn’t make much sense anyway.
Linux just isn’t Windows, and its whole underlying system works completely differently. Kind of a silly question in retrospect, right?

[AsPeeXXXVIII]

Which distro do you use?

EndeavourOS.

As a beginner, I was advised to stay away from rolling releases, so I went with Debian’s stability instead. The potential problem lies in the way updates are reviewed and released on Arch (Well Linux isn't just Linux) — it usually happens quite fast, and that’s not always a good thing, if you dont know kinda Pro on Linux.

I'll concede that Debian-based distros are generally more stable than Arch-based ones, but that stability does come at the cost of recency of package updates. And FWIW, I don't entirely agree with the notion of strictly recommending Debian-based distros even for beginners - I'm an advocate of letting a Linux newbie choose whether they prefer the stability of Debian or the bleeding-edge nature of Arch. There are pros and cons to both. But at the end of the day, as long as you update your system regularly and don't f**k with anything critical, the chances of you accidentally breaking it are ultimately pretty low even on an Arch-based distro.

[audiojunkie]

Which distro do you use?

EndeavourOS.

I too have used EndeavorOS. I used it for a year, when they first started. And I used Arch for 6 months prior to that. And they did indeed have manual breaks that required fixing. They use the exact same repos as Arch. The only real difference between the two is the installation, when you really get down to it. Arch requires manual intervention. Just look at the front page of the arch screen to see what manually needs to be done to frequently fix things:

https://archlinux.org/

It feels disingenuous to hear someone say that EndeavorOS doesn't require manual intervention, when clearly it does.

Now, I'll be honest, and say that what @Largos mentioned interested me. Having only used Arch based distros for my rolling distro experiences, I was not aware that there are rolling distros that don't require manual intervention. I intend to look into this much more--even if I don't plan to use a rolling distro. I like the idea of a rolling distro with no manual intervention.

I'll also say that I don't like the way Pacman requires manual housekeeping. I don't believe OpenSuse uses Pacman, so I'd be interested in knowing if OpenSuse requires any of that. I don't claim to know everything about linux. I'm no expert. But I'm no novice either. I love how Linux caters to nearly everyone though the various different distro types, and the differing methodologies that are used.

[AsPeeXXXVIII]

It feels disingenuous to hear someone say that EndeavorOS doesn't require manual intervention, when clearly it does.

I never once said EndeavourOS doesn't require manual intervention, merely that I have yet to experience any major problems after updating. Don't put words in my mouth.

[audiojunkie]

It feels disingenuous to hear someone say that EndeavorOS doesn't require manual intervention, when clearly it does.

I never once said EndeavourOS doesn't require manual intervention, merely that I have yet to experience any major problems after updating. Don't put words in my mouth.

Ah. I think of "Manual Intervention" as things that are broken that have to be fixed to get them working again. Semantics. I didn't mean to offend. I'm sorry.

[glokraw]

I have four working linux versions of various ages. There is one that never gets updated, the others rarely get full updates, just apps/libs that I am familiar with, and use often. I also have a spear-catcher distro, and an hour ago did a full update using synaptic , and all was well after reboot.

I don't have much faith in any OS providers, so I keep my most productive system isolated and enjoyable, and the wine folder holding commercial products is well backed up. So it can transplant in most scenarios. Clams at high tide

[Grizzellda]

See, I kinda feel that what you are talking about is like a closed system, like a hardware synthesizer, or a pocket calculator, computers that are designed for a fixed purpose, with no "software updates" in mind.

But I feel that with the modern personal computer scenario, ( super grateful!!!) keeping fresh and current is important, which is precisely why I have been supporting subscriptions!

Does not a modern Linux system need some basic maintenance at the very least? So what if is "rolling", or not? At some point, in a few years, we are all gonna probably want a new computer anyhow...well Grizzellda sure will, I am such a geek. Will Linux even run on your motherboard at that point?

That is what I mean.

[glokraw]

The main maintenance on my old best setup is keeping plenty of free contiguous disk space, and not having a browser cache with a gazillion files for the cpu to deal with. There are a few newer more demanding plugins and tools that want newer libs and graphics, so they are on their own drive, with a modern kernel, without turf wars. I hope to have them all on SSD's before Santa finds out I've been naughty with the plastic I need to find a couple more old motherboards to stash away against a hardware failure. Having a solid pci bus to record on is quite nice. Garage sales and 2nd-hand shops seem to be well stocked, if lacking the allure of getting something special, worthy of filming the unboxing.
Cheers

[jancivil]

I updated an OS once strictly in order to meet minimum requirements for things I had a definite use for. "needs" can evolve.

Weird to see on a Linux-oriented thread, talking locking down a system where "needs" are... 'balanced' in order to do that at all.

[uOpt]

Coming back to the thread title - comparing a rolling release to Windows updates.

One huge advantage of the rolling updates is that you can slice in anytime and cherry-pick a point in time with just single changes before and after when a change breaks you. Windows updates always contain many changes to many systems, it is all or nothing if you have to roll back.

Most notably this can sometimes allow you to take some security update but not a breaking non-security change (for a while).