Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Operating Systems › Linux, Unix › Plan9 REALLY likes Arch
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Plan9 REALLY likes Arch - Page 4  

post #31 of 97
Based on first hand experience and being a professional Unix Sys admin. Go read the horror stories here: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewforum.php?id=44
How many threads are there about people who have unbootable systems after an upgrade, how embarrassing.

Its a toy OS because its unreliable.

Rolling release is this term developers made up because they couldn't design a system that does release upgrades seamlessly. At least Arch developers acknowledge they can't do it, Ubuntu developers try and fail everytime.
post #32 of 97
I know I'll get labelled as a troll but if you look at the threads in the arch forum, every thread that is about a broken system marked as [solved] was solved with some one off fix which is different in every situation. This means that often when you do upgrades you have to go to various resources whether it be the wiki, forum or the website frontpage and look for one off solutions to their untested junk.

Archlinux people will classify a fixed issue as a non issue because it is fixed, so these people will claim they never have issues. Yes technically if you smart enough everything is fixable, by this logic I too have never had an Archlinux issue cause I can fix it. In my view these issues shouldn't have happened in the first place, that's why Arch is broken in my eyes.

The non Linux based FOSS OS I use which will not be mentioned so I don't get banned for starting a flame war, I use a single procedure for upgrades whether it is a minor or major version upgrade. I never have to do cheap hacks to get something to work, the procedure is always the same.
post #33 of 97
Running Arch for 4 years now. I've only had it break once. And that was user fault on my behalf as the update specifically said a file needed manual intervention and I neglected to read it, lesson learned, smooth sailing with no problems since. And no, not even ones that needed to be fixed, just flat out no issues.

And of course if you read the pacman / package error section you're going to find errors doh.gif

There's actually a number of threads dedicated to users like me who use it daily 24/7 for years on end with 0 issues. Usually in the /dev/null section of the forum ( which I believe you have to be logged in to see?, not sure on that ) and a few others..

Anyone with proper knowledge of administering their own system should have very, very little faults, errors, or downtime with Arch. When you get people who are new to Linux or Arch specifically who still don't know much about Linux, of course they're going to have problems. It's apart of the learning process, and if they stick with it they will learn. And you can't blame the new / bad users for their mistakes and marking threads as solved when they aren't or whatever the cause may be.

And honestly, I've had just as many ( or few, depending on how you look at it ) issues with my Debian, Cent and Fedora machines.

And of course you'll get labeled as a troll when you come into a thread and do nothing but talk smack and call things names like " junk " , " broken " , " banned for starting a flame war " , etc. Had you come with a better tone and possibly some better wording / phrases, that would be a different story.


There's also a few users here that use it constantly with little to no problems ( unless self inflicted :we dont have a devil smiley that's evil enough to go here: ).
post #34 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrak View Post

And of course if you read the pacman / package error section you're going to find errors doh.gif

Obviously... but you have to read the nature of the errors and the solutions to understand where I'm coming from. Sure many are user errors, but many are from poor developer testing.
post #35 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainBlame View Post

Obviously... but you have to read the nature of the errors and the solutions to understand where I'm coming from. Sure many are user errors, but many are from poor developer testing.

Care to point out one ot two? Most I've ever read on them have been 90+% user error.

Not saying it's perfect, but no distro is. And you can find many similar problems on others as well.
Edited by Shrak - 5/2/12 at 9:09pm
post #36 of 97
Lets see, here are examples of new kernels being pulled in with system updates causing issues.

https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=138105&p=1
Temporary fix: downgrade kernel
Solution: Kernel developers had to patch the kernel. So here we have an example of poor testing.

https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=140779
Kernel regression: Again poor testing, rolling release system pulls in new kernels constantly. Holding the kernel will cause incompatibilities with new software later.

https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=140754
Unresolved: Another example of rolling release not working.

https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=140691
Resolution: Downgrade kernel
post #37 of 97
Keep in mind 3 out of the 4 were on the front page and only 1 was on the third page yet its still pretty current (March). I'm sure if I dig through the archives I can find spectacular failures.
post #38 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainBlame View Post

Lets see, here are examples of new kernels being pulled in with system updates causing issues.
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=138105&p=1
Temporary fix: downgrade kernel
Solution: Kernel developers had to patch the kernel. So here we have an example of poor testing.
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=140779
Kernel regression: Again poor testing, rolling release system pulls in new kernels constantly. Holding the kernel will cause incompatibilities with new software later.
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=140754
Unresolved: Another example of rolling release not working.
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=140691
Resolution: Downgrade kernel

First one didn't need a downgrade. Bug from upstream with specific hardware, patch supplied to fix it, which imo is perfectly acceptable.

Second, program issue, not a kernel issue. You have to give programs time to update to newer dependencies. Basic stuff here.

Third, started last night, really going to bring it up without giving someone the chance to help? Shall we head to the Ubuntu forums and point out all the un-answered threads? They're kings of either not answering or plain old RTFM.

Fourth, downgrading is what he chose to do. Downgrading isn't always the solution and you can't blame people who don't know what they're doing to take the easy road out.



This is rolling release remember? Not everything is tested completely. These same kinds of things also slip by in plenty of 'stable' distro's as well. Even in Debian / Ubuntu they can't / won't test every single piece of hardware out there. And if they do, you'd have to wait 6 months for the next release to be able to use the hardware.

If you have such a problem with Arch or rolling release in general. The simple answer is to not use it. No one is forcing you. And obviously you have some kind of problem with either or as you're nit picking and puposely seeking stuff to be wrong. Like I said in a previous post, you can go to any 'stable' distro's forums and find plenty of 'horror' stories alike. If you dig through Ubuntu, Debian, Red hat, Fedora, Slack, BSD, or any archive you can find 'spectacular failures'.
post #39 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrak View Post

First one didn't need a downgrade. Bug from upstream with specific hardware, patch supplied to fix it, which imo is perfectly acceptable.
Second, program issue, not a kernel issue. You have to give programs time to update to newer dependencies. Basic stuff here.
Third, started last night, really going to bring it up without giving someone the chance to help? Shall we head to the Ubuntu forums and point out all the un-answered threads? They're kings of either not answering or plain old RTFM.
Fourth, downgrading is what he chose to do. Downgrading isn't always the solution and you can't blame people who don't know what they're doing to take the easy road out.
.

First, So he does an upgrade on 21 March and the patch was added 3 April. How was he meant to keep using the system without downgrading? This is not perfectly acceptable lol.

Second, give programs time to update to newer dependencies? ***, Not sure what you mean by this? Are you saying my apps should be broken while they test their new kernels on the general public?

Third and Forth are just more examples of updates breaking systems requiring manual intervention. Whatever the course of action, whether its a kernel downgrade or something else, doesn't change the fact that this OS is as fragile as Windows 95.
post #40 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainBlame View Post


First, So he does an upgrade on 21 March and the patch was added 3 April. How was he meant to keep using the system without downgrading? This is not perfectly acceptable lol.
Second, give programs time to update to newer dependencies? ***, Not sure what you mean by this? Are you saying my apps should be broken while they test their new kernels on the general public?
Third and Forth are just more examples of updates breaking systems requiring manual intervention. Whatever the course of action, whether its a kernel downgrade or something else, doesn't change the fact that this OS is as fragile as Windows 95.

 

First i'm gonna say, try not to double post, edit your previous post if no one else has responded.

 

I would honestly say, that is the price you pay if you want the features that arch linux offers, bleeding edge software, minimalist approach, etc. If you simply do not know what you are doing, or dont take any caution before any upgrade, then anything that happens is your own fault, not that of the developers, no one is forcing any one  to run the update process in pacman.

Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Linux, Unix
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Operating Systems › Linux, Unix › Plan9 REALLY likes Arch