My post/thread was about creating a backup of files before editing them to save some trouble for people who are attempting to edit things without experience or confidence. That’s all.
The only reason I made the post was because a few users were reporting breakages because they screwed up when trying to merge a recent pacnew file (passwd.pacnew), so I used that file as an example.
If users would make backups of ANY system file/config file before making an edit, it would make reverting changes faster and simpler in the event of an issue resulting from those changes.
Yes I understand looking at the post again what you are saying. I guess it was the title that prompted me to ask because i had noticed the pacnew files for passwd during an update.
Speaking statistically over time of helping 100’s of people over a period of years, I have seen many, many people break something trying to merge pacnew files. Conversely, not merging them rarely causes an issue of significance.
Lastly, I actually disagree with your point. Philosophically, I think the installation and the distro provided configs are just starting point. From there, each individual makes the system their own. In most cases, there is no need to continue to align with the latest configs from upstream.
If you want to keep your install close to the distro, great, you should. However, if you don’t want to, you shouldn’t feel like there is a responsibility to do so.
This is an excellent point. It especially holds for Arch, which comes with almost nothing default. That’s pretty much the only reason why EndeavourOS exists. It’s a good way to see EndeavourOS’ sane defaults as a starting point when making a DIY Arch-based OS.
As I see it, a GNU/Linux distro is, in essence, a provider of conveniently packaged software. The actual OS running on user’s computers can be quite different from what the maintainers of the distro envisioned.
I agree with this statement. I have been wondering where all the ‘newbie’ users are coming from. While everyone is welcome (and should be) it seems that the fact that Endeavour OS is aimed at intermediate
users seems neglected in most reviews and mentions of EOS.
I don’t have any problem with newbie’s using this distro - what has to be mentioned though is that Endeavour OS is based on Arch and some knowledge of linux is required.
Learning to use linux is still what i would consider a steep curve and starting with an Arch based distro isn’t doing newcomers to linux any favours. Remembering ‘The great grub disaster’ where users where required to chroot to make their systems bootable highlighted that. You can use EOS as a newbie, but if you do, be prepared for some work in the terminal. That may seem a little freightening, however if you are brave and accept that sometimes things will break you can win.
I came over from Manjaro years ago. I admit that using an Arch based distro I was in at the deep end so to speak. I try to fix things myself and 99% of the time with some reading on whatever caused the problem, I can fix it.
This is my experience. Your mileage (kilometerage? ) may vary.
Of course you can start with EOS - an OS aimed at intermediate linux users. If you do you will need patience and be willing to learn.
I mean what seems like rocket science to me seems like basic math to a rocket scientist. The issue isn’t Arch but all the distro’s that are based on it. We are close to vanillia arch so I would think that means we attract those who are a bit more familiar with the command line. Part of the issues is that People come from other Arch based distros and are not used to the minimalistic approach we have as an OS. This is a system you build yourself. The OS is only a foundation on which to build. Coming from those distro’s that keep you doing things in the GUI is what keeps you from knowing what is actually going on in the background.
It is apparently time to stretch a metaphor - hopefully not to th3e breaking point!
‘Driving’ EnOS is like driving a manual transmission car. You have some ‘modern’ assistive technologies (like fuel injection and ABS brakes), but mostly for success you have to pay attention! Easy fixes like consumables (lights, fluids, tires) you can do yourself, SOME things you CAN do yourself (like checking the importance of ‘Check Engine’ lights (on my car usually it thinks the gas cap is loose or leaking). Just driving MIGHT be a little more work with a manual, but it might not, too (I rarely have to touch the brake in stop/go traffic on the freeway (locally the 401) as lifting the gas pedal is often enough if you look ahead sufficiently. Other things you might need to read up a bit to ‘fix’, but not many.
OK - a bit of a stretch, but NOT that far! See below for a modern safety rant!
Safety and a manual tranny
The importance of a manual tranny is the looking ahead that it enforces on the driver, if an appearance of competence is desired. You can’t be in the right gear when needed if you don’t know what that gear is going to be! This leads to my conclusion that driver’s licences should be given ONLY after learning on a manual. Young drivers are heavily incentivized to learn to look ahead so as to look competent, or even skilled! The reason this is a factor is obvious when a young male is involved (gotta look good for your (hopeful) passenger) - and I speculate there is a similar effect on young women to be competent, although they are more likely (it seems) to be paying attention naturally…
Most of the new ‘safety’ features are examples of the Law of Unintended Consequences - as they ‘cover’ for the driver, except when they don’t. Drivers get inevitably careless when they don’t NEED to pay attention most of the time, so even an automatic is a danger - let alone such things as lane-keeping assist, auto braking and speed sensing cruise control. Have you noticed that the accident rates have stopped falling recently, after YEARS of improving every year? Not to mention that letting some entity other than oneself to have control of such things as steering and stopping is a huge risk factor - not to mention the hacker effects possible (whether they wear a cop hat of not). Nope - hydraulic steering and a manual tranny - and power assist confined to windows and door mirrors!
EndeavourOS is modern manual transmission with a silky-smooth clutch and rev matching. I had to learn on a “3 on the Tree” where you had to know how to double-clutch and often had to hold second in place so it wouldn’t pop out.
Continuing… Fedora is an automatic once it’s been set up. Mint is like a paddle shift. You can drive it like an automatic all day but still get access to the gearbox if you really want to
I attached a bungee cord to hold it in second on one of my ‘tree’ vehicles - luckily the extra ‘force’ wouldn’t pull it out of third! Needless to add, the next vehicle had a floor shifter…
One of the nicest trannies I dealt with was a 13-speed Roadranger - only needed the clutch once every 350-400 miles…
How are other distros managing this? What happens if I edit a file in Debian? Shouldn’t there also be some safety feature that saves the old file or something along the lines of a *.new file?
Edit: So it seems Debian does the same, but asks you what you want to do while updating. So you may have to merge files yourself, too. So I would say this isn’t really an arch problem, but a linux problem.
It’s not even a problem at all, it’s just called being polite and ask…Windoze or Mac won’t ask you sh*t they’ll just do whatever the hell they want with your files, coz it’s THEIR FILES!!1111
I see it as not even an “Arch thing” but as a doing stuff in general, even in life thing.
We seem to have reached a point in society where people just expect a plug ‘n’ play life with little or no input required.
As with most folk here I’ve hopped on many, many distros and I can’t remember one which didn’t require a little user intervention at some point, but I was never more than a quick question away from being able to sort out whatever needed sorting out.
It’s even easier here at EnOS as we have in my opinion the most active, friendly and helpful community around. I speak as someone who knew absolutely zero about anything to do with Linux just a few years ago.
Tap, tap, read, read, tap, tap, tap… “problem” easily solved.
This is what Archlinux says about its targeted audience.
Whereas many GNU/Linux distributions attempt to be more user-friendly, Arch Linux has always been, and shall always remain user-centric. The distribution is intended to fill the needs of those contributing to it, rather than trying to appeal to as many users as possible. It is targeted at the proficient GNU/Linux user, or anyone with a do-it-yourself attitude who is willing to read the documentation, and solve their own problems.
I am not saying that one needs to be a poweruser, a superuser or a super advanced user (none of which applies to me most certainly) to use Archlinux and by extension any of its descendants BUT at least a minimum of DIY spirit and mindset should be a minimum requirement.
Unfortunately that is not something you could inculcate people.
Other Linux have similar stuff. Fedora etc. have .rpmnew and .rpmsave. Not sure about Debian related Linuxes. They have apt for installation and perhaps something similar.
Fedora is the opposite of Arch. I was asking about it in their telegram and the guy there literally wouldn’t even talk to me about them, and got really pissed because several of us states taking about them and I told folks how I tended to then like in Arch. Users on Fedora are not supposed to mess with them in generali guess?
He finally told me Fedora managed them the other way, where when those files are created the new ones replace the old ones and the old ones are saved as the pacnew file. And was very irritated I was telling others how.
I don’t know if it’s true, but incredibly knowledgeable and part of the Fedora team so I don’t know why he wouldn’t know. It sounds a little backseats to me. But I’ve got one more year of craziness with work, so, to have complete mindless computing works for me. I guess we’ll see if she grenades this summer at some point lol
He also wasn’t happy with me because I had told someone else how to use fastest mirrors and increase parallel mirrors so they could speed up their installs/updates, and that’s “not how you use Fedora,” so maybe it’s totally wrong and he just didn’t like me lol.
I’m not too familiar with how Fedora (and RH) handle those config files, but when it comes to the mirrors they are definitely right. “Fastest” in the context of mirror ranking more often than not means “latency”. That’s not only true for Fedora, but also for Arch btw (no pun intended), which to my knowledge only tests speed (other than just latency) by fetching small samples not necessarily representative of the actual and consistent download speed under realistic loads.
For parallel downloads, you might benefit from raising them but you might also not. Depends on multiple factors (I’d guess eg download speed limit, threads, hardware in general (RAM, HDD/SSD write speeds). Probably best to do some personalized testing/benchmarking and deciding accordingly.
Edit: P.S: dnf is so slow I doubt you’ll notice difference from download anyway
I have to agree I drove OTR for over 20 yrs and always liked to 13 speeds the best.I also had an old 57 Chevy pickup that I had to hold it in 3rd to keep it from jumping out of gear.
) may vary.
