This boils down to the philosophy on:
“one believes is right for everyone else” vs.
“everyone choose what he believes is right”.
I give you analogy on the issues:
Issue 1
One performs Alt+C on a file. (One selects Refresh databases from Pamac menu).
System executes Alt+V immediately after Alt+C. (Pamac executes updates all apps immediately after performing refresh databases).
File duplicated in wrong folder, user has no control over the action. (System updated without user control.)
Issue 2
One selects 3 files to move to another folder. (One selects 3 apps to update).
Upon dragging 3 files to destination folder, ALL files in source folder get moved. (Clicking Apply gets ALL apps updated).
If the above analogy still unable to explain the issues, and I’m pretty stunned by the fact that Manjaro is telling users “you don’t need to know / choose what to update”, then I won’t be dragging this post any longer.
Such is the nature of a rolling-release distribution. You should not try updating individual packages without applying all available updates, because then you are going to break your system.
And then you — the impersonal “you” — will be coming here complaining about it and demanding that we help you fix it, even though we have already stated a gazillion times that partial updates are not supported.
In the end, the newbie always appears to know better than the developers. Until the smelly brown stuff hits the proverbial revolving blades, that is.
Either way, as has been explained a number of times already on this thread, pamac behaves exactly as intended with regard to updating the system. So please mark the post that explains this most adequately as the solution for this Support thread, and move on.
As @Aragorn already explained, that’s Rolling Release. You need to update everything at once.
Though, I wouldn’t be all that cavalier about partial updating a fixed release either. Do them all or not at all, or possibly suffer the consequences of a broken update,
I think there is an issue, but it’s not about what can be updated, it’s the forcing of updates when you don’t want to update.
Updates should be done when the sys admin has time to deal with any issues that may arise, or if necessary when you need to update to install something.
Also when it needs to do an update it should tell you first and ideally give you a list of what needs updating and the option to update later if you want (of course that means keeping another set of databases so it can also give up-to-date information, and not allowing operations which require an update).
Pamac was designed to do everything and to make it easy for people who don’t want to learn.
In short you’re using the wrong tool, use pacman, your favorite AUR helper and flatpak instead of pamac, then you have control.
You do realise that both pacman and pamac will append any and all system updates to even a simple update of any application.
For example I sshed into my partners machine to roll back kwallet,
sudo pacman -Syuu kwallet
but when I did, there were several other updates that got included in that rollback of a single package.
That’s how Linux package managers are designed. You can’t just deal with a single application or even a single package… and that ties back to how Linux is designed.
Given some people believe LLM AIs know more than Linux Devs and Admins, and Experienced Users. I asked an AI.
Why, on a Linux Operating System, should All updates, both User Applications and System Applications and Libraries, be done at the same time, and why is a Partial Update not recommended.
.
GPT-4o mini
Updating both user applications and system applications/libraries simultaneously on a Linux operating system is generally recommended for several reasons:
Dependency Management: Many applications depend on shared libraries and system components. If you update one application without updating its dependencies, you might end up with version mismatches that can lead to application failures or unexpected behavior.
Security: Security vulnerabilities can exist in both user applications and system libraries. Performing a full update ensures that all components are patched against known vulnerabilities, reducing the risk of exploitation.
Stability: Partial updates can lead to an unstable system. If some components are updated while others are not, it can create inconsistencies that may cause crashes or other issues.
Compatibility: New versions of applications may require newer versions of libraries. If you only update applications, they may not function correctly with older libraries, leading to compatibility issues.
Simplified Maintenance: Performing a full update simplifies the maintenance process. You can ensure that everything is up to date in one go, rather than having to track which components have been updated and which have not.
Testing and Validation: When updates are applied together, it is easier to test the system as a whole. If issues arise after an update, it is clearer which changes might have caused the problem.
User Experience: Users may experience a more seamless experience when all applications and libraries are updated together, as they are less likely to encounter bugs or issues that arise from version mismatches.
In summary, while it might be tempting to perform partial updates for convenience ( or to exercise Freedom of Choice ) *, doing so can lead to a range of issues that can compromise the stability, security, and functionality of the system. Therefore, a comprehensive update approach is generally the best practice in Linux environments.
Yes, because you told pacman to update, and downgrade any newer packages. That’s not how you’d update a single package.
That would be -S, which may still pull in updates to dependencies, but AFAIK only if a newer version is specified or it’s not already installed. Either way
Just to to be clear, I wasn’t saying they should update single packages.
I was saying they could treat the repos, the AUR and flatpaks separately - and you should at least treat the AUR separately as it’s often out-of-sync with the repos on a per “package” basis.
I’m not sure about flatpaks, as I don’t use them, but they’re meant to be self contained aren’t they. If so, surely some or all of them could be updated separately to the repos (at least when there’s no flatpak update).
Playing devils advocate, partial updates can be completely fine.
Firstly, most are likely to be new installs and as such not integral to the system, so even if you encounter issues, they’re often not a major problem.
Ultimately it depends on version incompatibilities, which with enough knowledge/research can be determined in advance (as long as there aren’t any unlisted dependencies and/or the source code is available).
Alternately, with a bit of experience, it’s not too difficult to determine/guess if the package(s) really matter and if not then you can roll the dice. If you have any issues then you update and reboot. Of course even if it works, you should still update at the earliest convenient time.
If it turns out the package(s) did really matter, then it might take longer to update, at worst a re-install (which isn’t too bad with a separate /home, a list of software to install, and maybe some backups of system-wide config).
It’s really only a problem when they ask for help with a weird issue and don’t mention it.
Well, I’d say that those criteria did not apply in this case. This was obviously an affliction with the ever-so-popular Newbie Knows Better Than Experts™ syndrome.
Personally, why take the risk. Doing it all now, and having a clean system, is a lot better than have to fix it later after attempting to circumvent the way the systems is designed to function.
