What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

maboleth · 2024-01-13 11:09:42

Soon KDE is releasing Plasma 6 officially so there will be a lot of major upgrades.

I've read https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/system_maintenance

But is there your personal preference how you deal with major system upgrades? Do you delete .config files of the upgraded systems and setup them from scratch again?

Since it's a rolling-release, I want to find the best way to make my PC be conflict-free and as fast as the first day of the install.

Allan · 2024-01-13 13:45:08

I do nothing other than "pacman -Syu"

Head_on_a_Stick · 2024-01-13 17:31:53

I stay away from complex desktop environments. There's a lot less to break with sway compared to Plasma

Trilby · 2024-01-13 17:45:35

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

I stay away from complex desktop environments. There's a lot less to break with sway compared to Plasma

Hey, that's the exact same reason I give for living in a tent under the railroad tracks rather than owning a home!

Head_on_a_Stick · 2024-01-13 17:47:32

You guys have homes?

Mr Green · 2024-01-13 18:09:58

Sway does not break? sign me up.... ;-)

maboleth · 2024-01-13 18:13:15

Uh, so consensus is - don't use complicated DE, or I don't do anything except -Syyu.

But what about us that do use 'complicated' DEs? Is it ok to delete main config files?

I wouldn't mind setting up the main system stuff from scratch in DE, as long as I don't delete some customized settings for certain apps.

What's the difference between .config/ and .local/share? Meaning, can I delete selected stuff in /share easier than .config?

Last edited by maboleth (2024-01-13 18:14:58)

Trilby · 2024-01-13 18:19:48

maboleth wrote:

so consensus is... don't do anything except -Syyu.

I'm not sure how you could infer a consensus in favor of something no one has ever recommended. In fact, that command is discouraged.

maboleth wrote:

Is it ok to delete main config files?

They're your configs. You can delete them if you want to - but I don't know why you would unless you don't like how you've configured things at all.

maboleth wrote:

... as long as I don't delete some customized settings for certain apps.

Then why would you want to delete your configs??

maboleth wrote:

What's the difference between .config/ and .local/share? Meaning, can I delete selected stuff in /share easier than .config?

Assuming you mean can you delete files from ~/.local/share easier than from ~/.config, it depends on what you mean by "easier". Either one would just be an "rm" command as a regular user... I'm not sure how it could be easier than that.

(Of course I'm being a little facetious as it seems you are worried about something other than what you are actually asking - but I couldn't speculate on what that actually is. So all I can do is answer the question as you asked it.)

Last edited by Trilby (2024-01-13 18:22:21)

maboleth · 2024-01-13 18:53:35

I was joking a bit about consensus too.

Then why would you want to delete your configs??

I was thinking about upgrades of the DE itself, like config files for DE, rather than of the specific apps.

My main concern during big upgrades are having some obsolete or corrupted config files that can slow down the system or cause bugged behaviour of DE. So I was eager to hear what KDE (or Gnome) users do after major new releases.

Trilby · 2024-01-13 20:30:03

There is no "DE itself". A DE is an abstract concept, not a piece of software. Abstract concepts do not get their own config files (try as I might, I can't get any software to honor settings in ~/.theInetIs4Pron). Programs have config files. Some libraries have config files. And this is no more or less true if those programs or libraries are considered part of a DE or not.

A "DE upgrade" just means that a good sized set of programs / libraries will all be updated at once. But other than the number of things being updated in one go, there is no difference from any other software upgrade. Good software will generally provide information on if / when a config file option has been added / removed - this may be more likely with major version updates of software: but again, this is no more true of software shipped as part of a "DE" or software that you'd consider a standalone program.

Last edited by Trilby (2024-01-13 23:22:17)

seth · 2024-01-13 21:38:14

You run "pacman -Syu" and then deal with problems iff they show up.
Unless you're Chuck Norris - then the problems will step aside automatically.

Bigger, more complex stuff is more prone to create more cruft on your disk, but it doesn't inherently break more likely on updates.
xmonad isn't exactly a big fat DE, but will break with every update because it's haskell.

Mr Green · 2024-01-14 09:49:04

If you are worried about your configs then maybe back them up. Create a new user to test things first.

Have run Arch for a while now and generally just update and fix things when they break.

Think with seth you are in safe hands ;-)

Head_on_a_Stick · 2024-01-14 10:17:09

seth wrote:

Bigger, more complex stuff is more prone to create more cruft on your disk, but it doesn't inherently break more likely on updates.

I would respectfully disagree. Programmers are absolutely useless and constantly make mistakes so the less code there is the less likely things are to break.

seth wrote:

xmonad isn't exactly a big fat DE

Yes it is. It pulls in half a gigabyte when I try to install it. So that's half a gig of crap code just waiting to break.

seth · 2024-01-14 13:19:57

It has massive haskell dependencies (which is why it breaks with every update), but is certainly not an integrated DE from an end-user perspective but a "lightweight X11 tiled window manager"
Like most electron applications aren't much to phone home about - they just operate on a massive infrastructure.

For the other aspect, you're projecting gnome onto everything else
The question isn't so much whether the update introduces new bugs but whether the update process is more fragile with more complex targets and I'd not see why.
haskell breaks on updates because there's no ABI and hardly an API and gnome breaks up updates because its using monkey-patching for extensions. Neither break because they're more complex but because of questionable design decisions.

The single-most complex thing you install is btw. probably the kernel. Or the browser.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2024-01-14 13:27:27

Or systemd

Ferdinand · 2024-01-14 13:35:53

Lol, this looks like borderline hijacking with at tgn topic

If OP likes Plasma, I think they should stay with that - after all, the power of control and the freedom to decide are big boons with Arch!

As for the question, I think it's safe to say the consensus, if there is any, would be to do what Allan and Seth said; use pacman -Syu (only one y - the Wiki explains)

There may of course be problems with any update, but they are usually found out quickly, and are posted about in the news on the Arch front page.

Stay cool - Arch is bleeding edge, and that's like taking a walk on the beach; sometimes you get wet, but that's part of the fun

Trilby · 2024-01-14 15:34:08

I'm off to make some bumper stickers, any takers?

Arch Linux: sometimes you get wet, but that's part of the fun

maboleth · 2024-01-14 17:00:33

me!

Arch Linux

#1 2024-01-13 11:09:42

What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#2 2024-01-13 13:45:08

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#3 2024-01-13 17:31:53

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#4 2024-01-13 17:45:35

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#5 2024-01-13 17:47:32

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#6 2024-01-13 18:09:58

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#7 2024-01-13 18:13:15

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#8 2024-01-13 18:19:48

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#9 2024-01-13 18:53:35

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#10 2024-01-13 20:30:03

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#11 2024-01-13 21:38:14

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#12 2024-01-14 09:49:04

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#13 2024-01-14 10:17:09

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#14 2024-01-14 13:19:57

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#15 2024-01-14 13:27:27

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#16 2024-01-14 13:35:53

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#17 2024-01-14 15:34:08

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

#18 2024-01-14 17:00:33

Re: What's the best way to deal with major system upgrades?

Board footer