Tools and practices for a stable rolling release distro like arch

Posted by silenceimpaired@reddit | linux | View on Reddit | 13 comments

BACKGROUND: I left PopOS because two updates in a row broke my capability to sign in. In the distant past I flirted with Arch based systems with Manjaro and thought about trying true Arch… but saw some comments about instability and so I went with Debian as people use it for servers. I am unhappy with Debian KDE as it’s had a few annoying quirks I am sure newer versions address… also I will have to do an upgrade soon. QUESTION/DISCUSSION: I’ve heard the claim Arch can be just as stable as Debian. What practices and tools do you use on your rolling release to ensure you don’t have issues. When did you last have an update issue? TLDR; what Tools and practices do you use with your rolling release distro? Thanks for your time.

Reply to Post

13 Comments

[-]

AutoModerator@reddit

This submission has been removed due to receiving too many reports from users. The mods have been notified and will re-approve if this removal was inappropriate, or leave it removed. This is most likely because: * Your post belongs in r/linuxquestions or r/linux4noobs * Your post belongs in r/linuxmemes * Your post is considered "fluff" - things like a Tux plushie or old Linux CDs are an example and, while they may be popular vote wise, they are not considered on topic * Your post is otherwise deemed not appropriate for the subreddit *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/linux) if you have any questions or concerns.*

[-]

FryBoyter@reddit

The term stable has two meanings (https://bitdepth.thomasrutter.com/2010/04/02/stable-vs-stable-what-stable-means-in-software/). With Debian, as with all LTS distributions, stable primarily means that as little as possible changes after an update, so that you can continue to use a particular application as before and that no changes to the relevant configuration files are necessary. Stability in the sense of problem-free is rather secondary and cannot be guaranteed given the sheer volume of packages offered by Debian. For example, I once had a problem with a Debian version where there was no backport for the ddclient package that would have fixed a bug when using the provider afraid.org. As far as Arch is concerned, you should always check https://archlinux.org/news/ before updating to see if anything has been published that affects your installation. If so, you must take this into account. You can automate the checking process itself using https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/informant, for example. It is also a good idea to clean the pacman cache regularly. You can use a hook that does this automatically (https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Pacman#Cleaning_the_package_cache). And from time to time, you should synchronise your customised configuration files with the Pacnew files. There are tools available to help with this (https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Pacman/Pacnew_and_Pacsave). I haven't done anything else myself for years and haven't had any problems. When it comes to Arch, unfortunately, a lot of nonsense is spread, either intentionally or unintentionally. Like, for example, that you have to repair Arch regularly after an update. Or that you generally learn more with Arch than with other distributions. As an alternative to Arch, I would recommend [OpenSuse](https://www.opensuse.org) Tumbleweed. This is probably the best-tested rolling distribution currently available.

[-]

BinkReddit@reddit

> afraid.org Love these guys.

[-]

ArtichokeRelevant211@reddit

stable rolling release lol

[-]

KrazyKirby99999@reddit

Arch is by definition not as stable as Debian. Each Debian release commits to not releasing breaking changes for several years. Arch does not make such as commitment. Arch only cares about providing Linux-compatible software to users with as few changes as possible. If upstream makes a breaking changes to your bootloader, desktop environment, hardware support, Arch will give you the breakage. >It is the user who is ultimately responsible for the stability of their own rolling release system. The user decides when to upgrade, and merges necessary changes when required. If the user reaches out to the community, help is often provided in a timely manner. The difference between Arch and other distributions in this regard is that Arch is truly a 'do-it-yourself' distribution; complaints of breakage are misguided and unproductive, since upstream changes are not the responsibility of Arch devs. [https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Frequently\_asked\_questions](https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Frequently_asked_questions) There are ways to improve stability, see the wiki. Put simply, install as few Arch/AUR packages as possible and keep backups. [https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/System\_maintenance](https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/System_maintenance)

[-]

silenceimpaired@reddit (OP)

That’s always been my general take but I see individuals saying they haven’t had issues for over a decade. So I assume there is more to discuss.

[-]

tulpyvow@reddit

Stability in Arch and its derivatives is, in 99.999% of cases, what you make of it. If you make a bad decision and it breaks, you can only blame yourself. Sometimes it does break due to someone elses fault but generally gets fixed in a day or 2. Meanwhile in fossil distributions (Debian, Ubuntu, e.t.c.), I've generally found that its usually more like 70% your fault, 29% packaging/distro fault and 1% hardware incompatibility. And with stable release distributions (Fedora and similar), its usually more in the middle.

[-]

BinkReddit@reddit

> Meanwhile in fossil distributions (Debian, Ubuntu, e.t.c.) Love the vernacular!

[-]

KrazyKirby99999@reddit

A breaking change may be possible or even likely, but it's not a guarantee that it would affect a particular user. If you have the right hardware and primarily use a browser with a conservative desktop environment, Arch can be reliable. However, it's impossible to know if the next update will break your system.

[-]

silenceimpaired@reddit (OP)

So having a simple system install is the tip.

[-]

dijkstras_revenge@reddit

If you want a really resilient arch system, you can use btrfs with automated snapshots via snapper and snap-pac. The setup is not super noob friendly, but if done right you will get automatic file system snapshots with every Pac-Man update, and if anything breaks you can just roll your system back to a pre-update state.

[-]

void4@reddit

Do not delay updates. First, the whole point of rolling release stability is that, it's much easier to deal with breaking changes in the software little by little, rather than upgrade the release and learn that half the packages is not working the way you used to. Second, arch maintainers extensively test important packages. I remember how they weren't upgrading the gpg version for 2 years because of some bug.

[-]

silenceimpaired@reddit (OP)

Yeah, that's one of the reasons I've avoided Arch. I've had times where I went a month without using my computer. These days it's daily as I'm addicted to AI. Any other tips or tools? Do you use backup software and how is it setup?