I had one of those “why have I not done this before” moments today after seeing some regressions with the latest kernel. Namely ;
Running the LTS kernel as default on rolling releases.
I’m assuming other people do this, it just hadn’t occurred to me for some stupid reason, ever. Absolutely here for the latest packages and application versions, but the one thing I need is a stable kernel.. Do people generally default to the latest kernel on Arch et al., or is it accepted that LTS is a legitimate option to calm the waters when it comes to bleeding edge kernel releases. I’d always just considered the LTS kernel as “fallback”. Doh..
I have used the LTS kernel for a long time simply because I wanted my experience as stable as possible. Yeah, Arch and EndeavourOS by definition are rolling release distros, but they are surprisingly stable with minimal work. The kernel, though, I don’t know if it adds to that or not in my case, since my hardware is from this decade and currently supported by the newest software.
I tried to use latest few times. And it always was complete bonkers at some point. Its like ok for 3 months and then TADA crazy issue and stuff and I just forced to use LTS in order for things to work.
So like a year ago I began to use LTS exclusively.
LTS is a legitimate option to boot. But please note that in case of Arch the LTS is the latest LTS kernel. As of today this is the 6.18.x. When a LTS will be created from the 7.x branch then 6.18 LTS kernel will be dropped to AUR and the Arch repos will shift to the new 7.x branch LTS. So technically the user gets a few years with the stable kernel.
It would have been so much better if all the LTS Kernels, i.e. 6.18.x, 6.12.x, 6.6.x, 6.1.x and others would be present in the Arch repos. With the AUR only hosting the zen, Liquirox and other kernels.
Also if the hardware is more than 5 years old then it is better to stick to LTS kernels.
Good to know I’m following in good footsteps then, the random regressions were annoying the heck out of me and I didn’t want to spend hours trying to test over and over. Nine times out of ten, it’s always been the kernel.
I use the LTS kentel as it works for me, O can usey the defalt not isies nit I just have not need to care wjocj I ak isomg, have borh stay sagerr in a way sorry if not to much sense
The reasoning is that as the hardware gets older, newer kernels do not introduce new features or new capabilities which can take full advantage of the older hardware. While if we stick to say LTS kernels then one gets stability with the bug fixes and security patches incorporated.
yer I know, had a bad one a year or so ago which has changed how I do a lot, know that I need this looked at just tying wrong letters from being able to touch type is a big shift , just trying to write this right took a few times,
There are a ton of new features that don’t depend on newer hardware. Also it happens often enough that fixes introduce unexpected new bugs, which are then backported to LTS making the whole point of “more stable” mood.
Personally I’m always for the latest distro kernel, and LTS as a fallback. But there’s nothing inherently wrong with LTS, if you feel more comfortable with it it’s totally fine.
This right here is the main reason I don’t use LTS kernels. When I first started my EnOS journey I installed the LTS kernel and had quite a few problems with my Zenbook with Strix-Halo CPU/GPU…even the mainline kernel had to go through several revisions before everything worked right. Now it’s smooth sailing. I wonder if some of those modules got backported to LTS?
