Linux Users, What's You Distro Experience?

[dellboy]

But who is going to wipe an installation and re-install everything? Is that what people do?

No. I never reinstall any OS, not even Windows. If it can't be repaired it is a junk OS and I won't use it, or I am too dumb to fix it and need to change that.

I made a mistake, I should have said "Is that what people do in Linux?"

In Windows I always have an image backup for emergencies, and Windows usually updates itself from version to version without any fuss. Linux world seems to be different, and updates and upgrades seem to be handled differently, and fresh installs appear to be the recommended route to upgrade.

[Largos]

But who is going to wipe an installation and re-install everything? Is that what people do?

No. I never reinstall any OS, not even Windows. If it can't be repaired it is a junk OS and I won't use it, or I am too dumb to fix it and need to change that.

I made a mistake, I should have said "Is that what people do in Linux?"

In Windows I always have an image backup for emergencies, and Windows usually updates itself from version to version without any fuss. Linux world seems to be different, and updates and upgrades seem to be handled differently, and fresh installs appear to be the recommended route to upgrade.

It depends on the release cycle. If there hasn't been a distro upgrade for two years, then it'd be recommended to do a fresh install because the change would be large. Compare that to a rolling release distro which is just constantly upgrading in small increments.

I use btrfs as my file system, this system allows snapshots. This means a snapshot image is taken before an upgrade and if it goes wrong, it can rolled back to the pre upgrade working state easily.

[audiojunkie]

But who is going to wipe an installation and re-install everything? Is that what people do?

No. I never reinstall any OS, not even Windows. If it can't be repaired it is a junk OS and I won't use it, or I am too dumb to fix it and need to change that.

I made a mistake, I should have said "Is that what people do in Linux?"

In Windows I always have an image backup for emergencies, and Windows usually updates itself from version to version without any fuss. Linux world seems to be different, and updates and upgrades seem to be handled differently, and fresh installs appear to be the recommended route to upgrade.

It depends on the distro you use. Not all distros are built the same or use the same parts. You’ve got to find what works best for you.

[uOpt]

I made a mistake, I should have said "Is that what people do in Linux?"

In Windows I always have an image backup for emergencies, and Windows usually updates itself from version to version without any fuss. Linux world seems to be different, and updates and upgrades seem to be handled differently, and fresh installs appear to be the recommended route to upgrade.

I would never use a Linux distribution that requires a reinstall for major release steps.

[audiojunkie]

I made a mistake, I should have said "Is that what people do in Linux?"

In Windows I always have an image backup for emergencies, and Windows usually updates itself from version to version without any fuss. Linux world seems to be different, and updates and upgrades seem to be handled differently, and fresh installs appear to be the recommended route to upgrade.

I would never use a Linux distribution that requires a reinstall for major release steps.

Agreed! I use Fedora Workstation right now (several years), and with the next release, I’m moving to Fedora Silverblue. If I’m lucky, it will be a hardware replacement before I ever have to install again. I think reinstalling once a decade will be plenty—every time I buy a new computer.

Incidentally, it was because of repeated failed upgrades with Ubuntu that I started my distro-hopping journey all those years ago. It doesn’t sound like much has changed.

I liked stability, but Debian was too old. I liked bleeding edge, but I disliked the manual intervention of the Arch family. I settled for “leading” edge, with solid releases every six months—Fedora Workstation. And now I’m getting ready to move to next generation, Cloud Native Linux. Silverblue looks to be just my cup of tea!

[dellboy]

I made a mistake, I should have said "Is that what people do in Linux?"

In Windows I always have an image backup for emergencies, and Windows usually updates itself from version to version without any fuss. Linux world seems to be different, and updates and upgrades seem to be handled differently, and fresh installs appear to be the recommended route to upgrade.

I would never use a Linux distribution that requires a reinstall for major release steps.

Agreed! I use Fedora Workstation right now (several years), and with the next release, I’m moving to Fedora Silverblue. If I’m lucky, it will be a hardware replacement before I ever have to install again. I think reinstalling once a decade will be plenty—every time I buy a new computer.

Incidentally, it was because of repeated failed upgrades with Ubuntu that I started my distro-hopping journey all those years ago. It doesn’t sound like much has changed.

I liked stability, but Debian was too old. I liked bleeding edge, but I disliked the manual intervention of the Arch family. I settled for “leading” edge, with solid releases every six months—Fedora Workstation. And now I’m getting ready to move to next generation, Cloud Native Linux. Silverblue looks to be just my cup of tea!

Nothing special about Fedora as far as I am concerned, clumsy me is quite capable of sinking any distro.

[audiojunkie]

I made a mistake, I should have said "Is that what people do in Linux?"

In Windows I always have an image backup for emergencies, and Windows usually updates itself from version to version without any fuss. Linux world seems to be different, and updates and upgrades seem to be handled differently, and fresh installs appear to be the recommended route to upgrade.

I would never use a Linux distribution that requires a reinstall for major release steps.

Agreed! I use Fedora Workstation right now (several years), and with the next release, I’m moving to Fedora Silverblue. If I’m lucky, it will be a hardware replacement before I ever have to install again. I think reinstalling once a decade will be plenty—every time I buy a new computer.

Incidentally, it was because of repeated failed upgrades with Ubuntu that I started my distro-hopping journey all those years ago. It doesn’t sound like much has changed.

I liked stability, but Debian was too old. I liked bleeding edge, but I disliked the manual intervention of the Arch family. I settled for “leading” edge, with solid releases every six months—Fedora Workstation. And now I’m getting ready to move to next generation, Cloud Native Linux. Silverblue looks to be just my cup of tea!

Nothing special about Fedora as far as I am concerned, clumsy me is quite capable of sinking any distro.

Well, stick with it! You are one of us!

[dellboy]

Why will a Linux VST3 not copy and paste into usr\lib\vst3, even though I am root and own the folder?

[j_e_g]

Um, unlike windows, linux uses forward slashes (ie, /) to separate directory names, not back slashes (ie, \).

Also, if you're specifying the full path, you need to include the root directory of the file system, which is a single forward slash at the start. So, your command would be:

Code: Select all

sudo cp ./MyVst.dll /usr/lib/vst3/

The dot and forward slash at the start of MyVst.dll just means that this vst is located in the current directory of your terminal window.

If you want to be able to copy the vst without worrying about your current directory, and the vst is in your home folder, you can do this (ie, Replace the dot with a tilde):

Code: Select all

sudo cp ~/MyVst.dll /usr/lib/vst3/

If the vst is on your desktop, you can do this:

Code: Select all

sudo cp ~/Desktop/MyVst.dll /usr/lib/vst3/

If there are any spaces in a file's or directory's name, then put the entire path in parentheses:

Code: Select all

sudo cp "~/My Folder/My Vst Name.dll" /usr/lib/vst3/

FYI, cp is the command that copies a file to another location (while leaving the original intact). mv is the command that moves (relocates) a file from one location to another.

And sudo is needed if you're doing something outside of your home folder (above, you're copying your vst to a location outside of your home folder), but you aren't logged in as root (ie, a mode where you have the ability to do anything to your system).

[j_e_g]

Also, when you copy something outside of your home directory, when you log back in as a normal user, you may get a "you do not have permission to access this file" error. So follow up with a chmod to change permission on the file:

Code: Select all

sudo chmod 775 /usr/lib/vst3/MyVst.dll

[uOpt]

Why will a Linux VST3 not copy and paste into usr\lib\vst3, even though I am root and own the folder?

You need to copy and paste the actual error message.

[dellboy]

Why will a Linux VST3 not copy and paste into usr\lib\vst3, even though I am root and own the folder?

You need to copy and paste the actual error message.

There is no message. The option to paste into the folder is greyed out.

[dellboy]

Um, unlike windows, linux uses forward slashes (ie, /) to separate directory names, not back slashes (ie, \).

Also, if you're specifying the full path, you need to include the root directory of the file system, which is a single forward slash at the start. So, your command would be:

Code: Select all

sudo cp ./MyVst.dll /usr/lib/vst3/

The dot and forward slash at the start of MyVst.dll just means that this vst is located in the current directory of your terminal window.

If you want to be able to copy the vst without worrying about your current directory, and the vst is in your home folder, you can do this (ie, Replace the dot with a tilde):

Code: Select all

sudo cp ~/MyVst.dll /usr/lib/vst3/

If the vst is on your desktop, you can do this:

Code: Select all

sudo cp ~/Desktop/MyVst.dll /usr/lib/vst3/

If there are any spaces in a file's or directory's name, then put the entire path in parentheses:

Code: Select all

sudo cp "~/My Folder/My Vst Name.dll" /usr/lib/vst3/

FYI, cp is the command that copies a file to another location (while leaving the original intact). mv is the command that moves (relocates) a file from one location to another.

And sudo is needed if you're doing something outside of your home folder (above, you're copying your vst to a location outside of your home folder), but you aren't logged in as root (ie, a mode where you have the ability to do anything to your system).

Sorry, but I am using Linux Mint because all this terminal stuff is beyond my capabilities. All I want to do is a simple right click copy and right click paste.

*edit: Thanks for your help.

[EnGee]

Why will a Linux VST3 not copy and paste into usr\lib\vst3, even though I am root and own the folder?

Why don't you use the home folder? You can find .Vst3 folder there and paste it there. I have installed all my plugins and related samples ..etc there in the home folder because this is the right way to do in Linux.

Otherwise, j-e-g is right. Use the terminal. It is easy and fun try it. I use it all the times, it is an important part of dealing with Linux, you can't avoid it

[dellboy]

Why will a Linux VST3 not copy and paste into usr\lib\vst3, even though I am root and own the folder?

Why don't you use the home folder? You can find .Vst3 folder there and paste it there. I have installed all my plugins and related samples ..etc there in the home folder because this is the right way to do in Linux.

Otherwise, j-e-g is right. Use the terminal. It is easy and fun try it. I use it all the times, it is an important part of dealing with Linux, you can't avoid it

Bitwig had usr/lib as a location so I thought that is where native linux vsts were supposed to go. I have put it in /home/vst3 now and it works. Thanks.