LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Arch
User Name
Password
Arch This Forum is for the discussion of Arch Linux.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 09-14-2012, 03:55 AM   #1
exvor
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2004
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS, Debian,Ubuntu
Posts: 1,537

Rep: Reputation: 87
pacman -Syyu strikes again!!


I know this forum is for solving issues and I feel a bit bad about posting this but I will anyway since I think this needs to be said. First things first, I don't upgrade my system every month. I do upgrades on it every 2 or 3 months and I was happy as a clam for years with arch and its rolling release model. But something has changed in the last year....

I have as a user become afraid to perform system upgrades because they keep breaking the entire system requiring me to reinstall. And now the installer just sucks, im sorry I wish I could be civil about that but we have gone from a installer that worked to scripts that you have to look up online to even figure out how to get a working system up and going. I understand why we went here because the previous installer was broken, but why did we opt out or cop out and just say screw it were just gonna write scripts to do it. Instead of fixing the installer and rewriting a good one.

Breaking the system really was not a problem considering I normally never has issues doing upgrades and the first time it happened was the switch over to the new /usr system. I can forgive this and work around it. But now it seams every time I go to upgrade there is some new problem with pacman not being able to upgrade the system and I have to track down the problem on the ARCH web page. Why does this keep happening? Why does the utility that is supposed to keep the system error free causing the most damage? Why are the issues not being fixed or something sent along with the upgrade to resolve the errors? Why is it only been the past year when these issues have occurred and why does it seam there is no effort to resolve them.

I used to love ARCH it was like LFS with a package manager and it was awesome, but it just seams lately that the maintainers of this system are at war with the users, or just simply not resolving problems before releasing them. I can forgive the first couple of times this happened but if I have to spend hours fixing a system because the package manager has torn it up.. whats the point of using ARCH anymore and not just doing LFS? It really saddens me to see this direction from ARCH and I am sad to say I may just have to say goodby and look into gentoo or something. Maybe ill come back when we have worked out the problems. I really hope things settle back down.

Last errors I got from pacman cannot upgrade glibc directory lib exists.
Cannot upgrade fontconfig because fonts are there?
 
Old 09-14-2012, 05:28 AM   #2
pixellany
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Location: Annapolis, MD
Distribution: Arch/XFCE
Posts: 17,802

Rep: Reputation: 740Reputation: 740Reputation: 740Reputation: 740Reputation: 740Reputation: 740Reputation: 740
Hmmm---I have been doing updates ~ once per month since my last ARCH setup 6 months ago. It's not THAT bad. Yes, there are issues---my latest: The update supplied a new cupsd.conf file and I missed the warning during install (It was in the logs).

What I have learned lately is to read the ARCH news before doing an update.

ARCH is not perfect, but it's still my favorite---annoyances and all.
 
Old 09-14-2012, 02:20 PM   #3
exvor
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2004
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS, Debian,Ubuntu
Posts: 1,537

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 87
I hear you pixellany but again you say you do updates every month. When I kept up on them like that everything was fine, its when I leave it for a few and then come back where I get issues. Like I said ARCH is my favorite distro but the recent problems and shifts to different ways of doing things in the system makes me wonder if they are giving into bad user requests instead of keeping the system simple.

More then likely when they finally stop screwing with the base system directories ill probably come back as it seams this is the source of many of the recent problems lately.
 
Old 09-18-2012, 01:08 AM   #4
ruario
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2011
Location: Oslo, Norway
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 2,446

Rep: Reputation: 1507Reputation: 1507Reputation: 1507Reputation: 1507Reputation: 1507Reputation: 1507Reputation: 1507Reputation: 1507Reputation: 1507Reputation: 1507Reputation: 1507
I think the simple answer is the one your already know, you have to update more often. I believe most Arch users do this and hence most don't encounter the problems you do. You can't blame the maintainers for catering primarily to how the the majority of the users work. If this does not suit your workflow, perhaps Arch is not the distro for you?

With regards to the installer and its replacement by various scripts I have to say that in my experience this sounds more dramatic than it actually is. I actually find the new install process easier and faster. For a more complete summary of my own experiences with recent live media read this post.
 
Old 09-21-2012, 04:10 PM   #5
SilentSam
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2007
Location: Ottawa
Distribution: Arch Linux/Kubuntu/OpenSUSE
Posts: 300

Rep: Reputation: 37
I was hit hard by the /lib becoming a symbolic link of /usr/lib as well. It was definitely my problem though. If you run
Code:
pacman -Syu
during an update that will break your system, it won't let you upgrade. If you then force the upgrade with
Code:
pacman -Sfyu
and your system is broken afterwards, then really you have noone else to blame but yourself. I've since learned that if an update fails, it's time to read the main Arch page.

I've never had to reinstall after hosing my system either. Usually enough people do the same that a fix, regardless of how technical, is up and running in a matter of hours.

For the /lib glibc fix, the pages here and here both worked well.
 
Old 09-22-2012, 07:24 PM   #6
exvor
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2004
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS, Debian,Ubuntu
Posts: 1,537

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 87
Ok you guys makes some valid points and ill address some I disagree with here. Also I would like to say that I am all in favor of this being as friendly as possible and I think I bring up some points that are valid.

Quote:
With regards to the installer and its replacement by various scripts I have to say that in my experience this sounds more dramatic than it actually is
This quote is completely untrue and is biased by your experience. Having an easy installer is the mainstay of just about every single distribution out there besides gentoo. Arch had a wonderful installer that started to break more and more as time went on but its roots were good. Having a installer that has inbuilt documentation on how to get everything to install is extremely beneficial to users of every level. This is true if you are installing the system on a single system with no other access to another computer to read a web page that you may not have access to. At least at the minimum include a html file on the boot disk on how to install the system without requiring the need for web access. ( Even LFS does this ) In my opinion moving to pure scripts to install the system is just laziness and to be fair ARCH is run by people doing it in there spare time and I can excuse this. There were also valid reasons for not using the installer as it was several broken and causing more problems anyway. Alas I digress this needs addressed the current solution is not ideal but if your doing ARCH you probably wont mind anyway but I though it was still fair to point out that it has devolved instead of evolved.


Quote:
and your system is broken afterwards, then really you have noone else to blame but yourself.
This is also not entirely accurate. I have had pacman break things without using the force option, I almost never use -Syfu. One note is trying to update xbmc and having pacman complain that font directories were already present then when trying to back out and use Xorg none of the fonts worked, there was literally noting on the screen.

Quote:
You can't blame the maintainers for catering primarily to how the the majority of the users work.
I agree with you here I cannot blame them for this, however I can blame them for not fixing pacman to stop breaking when this happens. ( what does this mean )?

Let me explain. This whole /lib issue currently is an example of what I am trying to express. This was known to break things, it was seen in testing, it was reported to the maintainers. Was pacman modified so that it would not hose systems currently running ( perhaps automated scripts )... no. Ok so thats cool one breakage because of a major change is cool we all understand reprogramming pacman is a pain in the rear. But then it happened again... Whats the problem here? why cant pacman resolve this problem and we keep leaving users to comb over the arch page to fix a problem that is known will happen with the package manager? Why has the attitude to problems been shifted to ( make the users fix it ) rather then admitting that pacman needs some tweaking? Arch is gaining a share of linux users and thats a great thing but if this attitude continues people will migrate away to a project that can keep there package manager working or at least address its shortcomings without an elitist attitude toward the users. Believe me please when I say I hate to write this about ARCH, and its very possible that the intentions of the maintainers are being misinterpreted.

I just hope that the benefits of these major changes are beneficial in some way and not just being done because they are the new cool thing on the block. Breakage without benefits are some of the major key issues as to why "linux sucks" and one of the key things that needs to be addressed to make linux more popular.
 
Old 09-23-2012, 05:34 PM   #7
Roken
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2011
Location: Bolton, UK
Distribution: Arch local, Debian on VPS
Posts: 258

Rep: Reputation: 41
Both of the glibc and /lib, and the fontconfig problems were well documented in advance over at the Arch forums and website. If you use a rolling release and fail to read the "heads up" notes before updating, then the only person at fault is you.

I made it through both of these upgrades without issue (and the migration to systemd, too), simply because I read the notes first.
 
Old 09-25-2012, 10:59 AM   #8
SilentSam
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2007
Location: Ottawa
Distribution: Arch Linux/Kubuntu/OpenSUSE
Posts: 300

Rep: Reputation: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by exvor View Post
This is also not entirely accurate. I have had pacman break things without using the force option, I almost never use -Syfu. One note is trying to update xbmc and having pacman complain that font directories were already present then when trying to back out and use Xorg none of the fonts worked, there was literally noting on the screen.
I'm unsure as to why this would happen... Pacman upon finding that the font directories were still present should terminate the upgrade before any installation occurs. None of the packages downloaded should have been installed, since the presence of the font directories is detected in the step before.

The only times I ever had pacman -Syu 'break' my system were due to nvidia binary / Xorg incompatibility issues, and those didn't happen too often.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why do we need pacman-key if pacman checks md5? Mr. Alex Arch 5 03-09-2012 05:05 PM
Anyone else 'pacman -Sy' instead of simply 'pacman -S'-ing packages? Kenny_Strawn Arch 15 03-23-2011 01:09 PM
Disaster Strikes! (again) Completely Clueless Linux - Newbie 4 04-12-2009 11:27 AM
Disaster strikes ......... pc does not boot honeybadger General 1 10-01-2008 02:01 AM
qmail strikes again Cubiq Linux - Software 1 10-11-2004 08:38 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Arch

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:14 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration