Arch Testing like Debian Testing

agapito · 2010-10-13 12:41:00

First excuse my poor english. I hope you understand me

Arch is my favourite linux distro so far. Probably without Archlinux i wouldn't use Linux anymore. But sometimes i found some inestability and crashes on certains programs and this is frustrating. Ok, my suggestion is follow the same policy of Debian Testing. It would be possible upload ALL packages to testing repo first and is there aren't bugs reports opened for 7 or 10 days pull those packages to stable repo. I think stability should be a priority for Arch, because being rolling release you have more possibilites to broke your system.

Thanks.

Allan · 2010-10-13 12:41:54

agapito wrote:

It would be possible upload ALL packages to testing repo first and is there aren't bugs reports opened for 7 or 10 days pull those packages to stable repo.

No.

agapito · 2010-10-13 12:46:46

Allan wrote:

agapito wrote:
It would be possible upload ALL packages to testing repo first and is there aren't bugs reports opened for 7 or 10 days pull those packages to stable repo.
No.

Why? Aren't there enough devolopers?

Allan · 2010-10-13 13:07:19

The main issues is there is not enough people using [testing] so most bugs are not noticed until we push stuff to the main repos anyway. So all this serves to do is delay software updates.

drcouzelis · 2010-10-13 13:09:24

agapito wrote:

Why? Aren't there enough devolopers?

That would be a lot of extra work.

Most packages are very stable. If you upgrade a package and there is a bug, then it is easy to downgrade the package and submit a bug report.

Do you use an application that crashes? Have you asked about the bug on the Arch Linux forums? Have you told the application developers about the bug?

I like working with application developers on bug reports. I think it's fun.

Last edited by drcouzelis (2010-10-13 13:10:08)

toofishes · 2010-10-13 13:28:03

agapito wrote:

Allan wrote:
agapito wrote:
It would be possible upload ALL packages to testing repo first and is there aren't bugs reports opened for 7 or 10 days pull those packages to stable repo.
No.
Why? Aren't there enough devolopers?

Are you serious? I count 31 names on http://www.archlinux.org/developers/, and even that is pushing it. 31 to run an entire distro (plus the TUs, I'm not trying to forget you). Let's take a look at Debian. First thing I notice is they have an LDAP server set up to manage their developers, so we're already beat. Then I run a search (http://db.debian.org/search.cgi) with the only criteria being they have a PGP key (fuzzy search for 1:), and 563 developers pop up.

We are not a big distro, and we do not pretend to be. We are most definitely not a Debian "releases work for five years and we promise no breakage" distro.

Allan · 2010-10-13 13:49:05

toofishes wrote:

Are you serious? I count 31 names on http://www.archlinux.org/developers/, and even that is pushing it.

Definitely pushing it... I'd say 12 or 13 of those do no packaging at the moment.

fsckd · 2010-10-13 15:39:43

Looks to me there is some misunderstanding about the number of bugs in Debian Stable/Testing/Unstable. They do have their share of severe and critical bugs appear in Testing and Stable.

ASOM · 2010-10-13 16:19:10

If you need your distro to follow Debian's practices, wouldn't it make sense to just use Debian?

agapito · 2010-10-13 16:41:41

ASOM wrote:

If you need your distro to follow Debian's practices, wouldn't it make sense to just use Debian?

Because i am always testing a lot of programs and Debian don't have AUR or ABS!! I was using Debian Testing 4 years ago and i was bored of install dependencies and run ./configure;make;make install, Debian repos are limited. I can't live without AUR or something similar.

lifeafter2am · 2010-10-13 17:12:49

agapito wrote:

ASOM wrote:
If you need your distro to follow Debian's practices, wouldn't it make sense to just use Debian?
Because i am always testing a lot of programs and Debian don't have AUR or ABS!! I was using Debian Testing 4 years ago and i was bored of install dependencies and run ./configure;make;make install, Debian repos are limited. I can't live without AUR or something similar.

Gentoo?

ngoonee · 2010-10-13 23:32:03

agapito wrote:

I think stability should be a priority for Arch, because being rolling release you have more possibilites to broke your system.

It is not, not in the way you're thinking. If upstream breaks, Arch breaks. This is not debian, hence we don't have that army of ants running around just to make sure YOUR system doesn't crash in a way inconvenient to you.

I suggest running [testing] on another machine under your control if you're THAT concerned about stability. But if you're so concerned about stability perhaps you shouldn't use Arch in the first place. It is not unstable (compared to debian sid for example) but it is not geared towards stability like Red Hat's stuff....

cesura · 2010-10-14 01:32:37

Allan is right. 31 developers + 25 TUs is pushing it. Your mind is in the right place, but it just isn't ideal.

Besides, this isn't my full-time job. I don't do it for money, I do it because I want to.

Inxsible · 2010-10-15 03:54:15

itsbrad212 wrote:

Besides, this isn't my full-time job. I don't do it for money, I do it because I want to.

Look at you Brad, already shirking off your responsibilities. You better start cracking at packaging the apps

axel668 · 2010-10-15 11:52:16

For me this is not a matter of headcount - even if Arch had a million developers, I would still want the unmodified upstream packages as soon as they are released as stable by their authors. That's why I'm using Arch in the 1st place. More testing is always good, but it should happen in the upstream projects and not on distribution level.

Besides, since I switched to Arch (about a year ago) I never broke my system through an upgrade, so I really don't see any big stability issues. And if you really need stability as in stable enough to run a mission critical business server, you shouldn't be using Arch (or any rolling release distro) in the 1st place, but dig yourself in on some version of Debian (Stable !) orCentOS or openSUSE.

Last edited by axel668 (2010-10-15 11:53:46)

Garrik Dimble · 2010-10-23 06:34:02

totaly agree with axel668.

I started to use Linux with Debian and the fact was my wireless interface couldn't be used because the realese included a too old Linux kernel. I then had 3 choices :
- don't use my wirelesse interface (well, not a real solution)
- compile the kernel by myself (wich is quite frightening when you are just a begginer)
- change distro (which I actually did)

I regularly update my Arch system just paying attention to the Arch news and nothing serious happened to my system (provided I updated it often enough). Generaly when my system is broken, the problem comes from my keyboard/chair interface.

kazuo · 2010-10-23 07:32:00

I love when my system break! (really, no sarcasm). Is the best indicator of changing for me.

And as axel668 said I choose Arch for it being always on edge, I prefer to deal with breakage and possible help upstream to solve something than to wait for a "stable" software.

Really, when I help debugging/solving a break/bug in a software I become happy for a week at least, a lot better than all antidepressants (sometimes I get insomnia but cant help as I can take 20mg of lorazepam and not even get a yawn)!

mhertz · 2010-10-23 15:33:34

Since arch only uses stable packages, and is rolling release, then I don't even think that there should be a testing repo!

If something breaks, then we report to upstream and downgrade, period! That is our job, and not arch's, imho!

Last edited by mhertz (2010-10-23 15:37:33)

ilusi0n · 2010-10-23 20:05:19

mhertz wrote:

Since arch only uses stable packages, and is rolling release, then I don't even think that there should be a testing repo!

I don't actually agree with that afirmation. For me I believe the "stable" repository of arch is wayyyy too stable and is great to be like this. They, I believe, test every package before moving it from the testing to the stable repo. Don't you think that some of the packages needs some kind of patchs to don't break or imcompatibilities with another packages in your system?
Testing repo exists for people try and give a feedback about the new packages. They are used for developpers testing them and see if is everything good with them and if is important waiting for the user's feedback that uses the testing repo. Is great how is done because I believe developpers can't test everything
If the testing repo didn't exist and they moved everything to the stable repo. Yes you would have a system very updated more fast than it is now. But believe me, you don't want to lose minutes, hours or days trying to solve things because they weren't tested and there weren't on a testing repo to give feedback first...
Testing repo exists for a reason and a good reason. Testing repo should never be removed...

mhertz · 2010-10-23 21:00:34

Not all packages comes to testing repo, but only stuff which is presumed to possibly break. Anyway, I admit I maybe was a bit shortsided with that comment, but still, I don't agree with the op's suggestion about every package needing to go through testing first.

The upstream has allready had a testing phase for each package, where breakage could be reported, before the packages gets deemed stable and hence, ends up in our beloved distro, and even if not being completelly stable, then downgrading in arch isn't really rocketscience...

Last edited by mhertz (2010-10-23 21:10:47)

ilusi0n · 2010-10-24 00:09:14

mhertz wrote:

Not all packages comes to testing repo, but only stuff which is presumed to possibly break. Anyway, I admit I maybe was a bit shortsided with that comment, but still, I don't agree with the op's suggestion about every package needing to go through testing first.

Yes I don't agree either but removing the testing repository is a mistake. Yes downgrade isn't very difficult but if the problem isn't on the package and related to other stuff that you have no idea? Imagine the headaches you would have and the number of threads increasing in Arch forum and many people, pherphaps complaining...

Arch Linux

#1 2010-10-13 12:41:00

Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#2 2010-10-13 12:41:54

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#3 2010-10-13 12:46:46

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#4 2010-10-13 13:07:19

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#5 2010-10-13 13:09:24

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#6 2010-10-13 13:28:03

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#7 2010-10-13 13:49:05

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#8 2010-10-13 15:39:43

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#9 2010-10-13 16:19:10

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#10 2010-10-13 16:41:41

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#11 2010-10-13 17:12:49

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#12 2010-10-13 23:32:03

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#13 2010-10-14 01:32:37

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#14 2010-10-15 03:54:15

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#15 2010-10-15 11:52:16

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#16 2010-10-23 06:34:02

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#17 2010-10-23 07:32:00

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#18 2010-10-23 15:33:34

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#19 2010-10-23 20:05:19

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#20 2010-10-23 21:00:34

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

#21 2010-10-24 00:09:14

Re: Arch Testing like Debian Testing

Board footer