What are the odds of breaking?

SyntaxError · 2018-03-21 19:46:07

Sup!

Long story short I might join the army later this year which would mean that I wouldn't be home much, especially during the initial part of it.
What would be the odds that my system would break if I didn't update it for months (let's say 4 months), but then one day decided to do so?

Roken · 2018-03-21 19:58:26

I'd suggest that you make sure you have a full backup. Whilst I have very few breakages (maybe once or twice per year - and manageable) a four month gap could result in varied changes, from simple configuration to catastrophic. Upon return, I'd be tempted to manage the upgrade manually, with a check to see what needs to be updated, making sure that the base system is updated in full, and then make the application updates a few at a time. That way, if anything does break, and worse, results in a non-booting system, you can easily isolate the culprit. Kernel updates (on testing) seem to be coming at a rate of knots lately, with associated driver updates, and that's where you will most likely hit the catastrophic scenario. I work on the basis that if the kernel starts to boot, then I can fix in place without chroot.

Of course, you may simply find that everything just works - which will be a happy day.

Last edited by Roken (2018-03-21 20:23:49)

Trilby · 2018-03-21 19:59:18

Just check the news. Over any random 4 month period from the past few years there'd not likely be much of a problem (just a lot to update when you get back). But if there is a news item in that time requiring manual intervention, then you may want to do an intermediate-step update from the arch linux archive first.

edit:

Roken wrote:

check to see what needs to be updated, and then make the updates a few at a time.

Absolutely don't do this. This will almost certainly result in a totally broken system. Roken you almost certainly know better than this, so why on earth would you give such dangerous advice?

Last edited by Trilby (2018-03-21 20:01:28)

Roken · 2018-03-21 20:02:51

Trilby wrote:

Roken you almost certainly know better than this, so why on earth would you give such dangerous advice?

I assume a measure of knowledge. System updates are very different from application updates. If an application breaks, it's non-critical. I would expect a user to ensure that the base system is updated correctly.

EDIT: But I DO take your point. I apologise. I've modified the reply.

Last edited by Roken (2018-03-21 20:24:12)

Trilby · 2018-03-21 20:26:04

No, that's still complete crap. This is arch linux, not BSD. There is no separation between the "base system" and "applications". There are just packages. You update them all at once or not at all - otherwise expect breakage. Partial upgrades are not supported and advising others to do partial upgrades is inappropriate here.

Last edited by Trilby (2018-03-21 20:26:20)

SyntaxError · 2018-03-21 20:44:38

So to take away from this discussion. Updating everything at once is the way to go, unless there are packages that require manual intervention and that it might not hurt having a backup laying around just in case.

Slithery · 2018-03-21 20:51:22

Not quite.

If there are packages that require intervention then use the ALA to update the entire system to a date just after the oldest relevant news item.
Rinse, repeat.

I've successfully updated a system that's been without updates for years by stepping through the appropriate dates one at a time.

As to having a backup, that's up to you. I never have backups of my system files as it's so quick and easy to reinstall Arch from scratch, but I do backup all of my configs and user files.

R00KIE · 2018-03-21 20:52:06

What Trilby was implying is that you may have to switch the mirrors you are using to Arch Linux Archive[1] to update your machine in steps until you can switch back to the "normal" mirrors, this way you can bring the system up to the point where manual intervention is (or might be) needed and proceed from there.

The common advice for people who have spent a long time without updating is to update in maybe 1 month steps, it's not a too small time range that it will get cumbersome and not a too large time interval that might risk breakage (there is always the chance though, I guess it is assumed you do regular updates so some dependency or incompatibility might slip through).

In any case do not do partial updates, it will result in a broken system.

[1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Linux_Archive

eschwartz · 2018-03-21 21:00:38

I will third the suggestion to use the ALA in order to step through updates as though you were there all along to update weekly or whatever.

SyntaxError · 2018-03-21 21:07:28

Ah okay my bad, I understand now. Thanks for the information!

MindfulConsumer · 2018-03-30 08:05:36

I was a bit nervous starting full system upgrade after some 6 months, but despite serveral 'warning: dependency cycle detected' warnings everything went smooth! so I'd say odds are very low

SyntaxError · 2018-03-30 09:27:48

Indeed that might be true, but it wouldn't surprise me if the issues hasn't yet been shown to you and that they might show up during time in some way or form. Just because the system booted up fine doesn't mean that there might be some backend stuff that doesn't work.
So I'll stick with the ALA option even tough it will take time, thanks anyway

Trilby · 2018-03-30 11:02:19

SyntaxError wrote:

Indeed that might be true, but it wouldn't surprise me if the issues hasn't yet been shown to you and that they might show up during time in some way or form.

It would very much surprise me. If the update completed without error, then it's a success - simple as that.

The one exception would be that perhaps there would be changes to configuration options for some software and a given program may not work the way it used to. But this is no more true of an update after a long absence as it is of any other update. If the affected package had system-wide configurations, there would be a pacnew file. But again, the need to merge these pacnew files is not more important in a big update than a normal update.

Allan · 2018-03-30 11:33:18

I upgraded a system after almost two years... worked fine.

Lone_Wolf · 2018-03-30 11:54:16

Longest period for me was 28 months (a laptop I only use as last resort).
In those 28 months pacman gained package signing, so i had to use the Arch Rollback Machine (precursor of Arch Linux Archive) .
It took a lot of time , but was very successfull.

SyntaxError · 2018-03-30 12:35:18

Hmhm I see. Was it your main system, Allan?

Trilby · 2018-03-30 12:54:30

Probably. Allan is known for not paying much attention to arch linux development

SyntaxError · 2018-03-30 13:42:08

Haha :')

ugjka · 2018-03-30 19:16:42

you could probably read the dev mailing list to see if there are any major changes upcoming

Arch Linux

#1 2018-03-21 19:46:07

What are the odds of breaking?

#2 2018-03-21 19:58:26

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#3 2018-03-21 19:59:18

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#4 2018-03-21 20:02:51

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#5 2018-03-21 20:26:04

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#6 2018-03-21 20:44:38

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#7 2018-03-21 20:51:22

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#8 2018-03-21 20:52:06

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#9 2018-03-21 21:00:38

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#10 2018-03-21 21:07:28

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#11 2018-03-30 08:05:36

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#12 2018-03-30 09:27:48

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#13 2018-03-30 11:02:19

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#14 2018-03-30 11:33:18

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#15 2018-03-30 11:54:16

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#16 2018-03-30 12:35:18

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#17 2018-03-30 12:54:30

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#18 2018-03-30 13:42:08

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

#19 2018-03-30 19:16:42

Re: What are the odds of breaking?

Board footer