That is what I want to discuss about on how this could be fixed and talk about why there would there be a issue with dependencies when upgrading from lets say you are using linux-lts and it is currently kernel 5.15, you get a package update in pamac and it update linux-lts to kernel 6.1. Why can’t that just also grab the 6.1 dependencies like it would if you manually installed and of the kernels from Manjaro kernel manager? Even Arch can do this and uses the linux-latest and Linux-lts packages but with Manjaro we can slow the update cycle down and ensure that everything has been tested and checked as usual before release.
You you mean just going from lets say 5.15 to 6.1 LTS you are against? if you had and issue and had to change to a older kernel or just use the advanced option (which is currently the default kernel menu in the gui) to stick with a certain if you preferred that.
I think the mainline option should be there just in case people do need a newer kernel for any reason that would follow that mainline branch that Manjaro has deemed ready to use obviously ignoring the testing kernels.
I agree on this tho if you were on the LTS kernel branch this wouldn’t be a issue as you would just get a update in pamac to upgrade linux-lts with all your other packages.
This for example would revert back to the current default advanced mode where you would be using the latest manually installed kernel if it was newer and you could manage if you wanted to keep the lts package etc yourself instead of just following the streamline lts kernel package.
Yes I agree of the people who don’t yet know how Linux fully works and don’t need the advanced controls yet this would be a good option to have.
This is why we are discussing it, to figure out what went wrong and how we can fix/improve on what we have, like I said Ubuntu, Fedora workstation, Ubuntu and even Arch all all their derivatives already do this just fine so why can’t Manjaro do the same and that is what I wish to discuss.
Yeah I wouldn’t recommend using a AUR kernel package for a system.
Not much use? this is how every other Linux distro work, this simplifies what doesn’t need to be complicated but this doesn’t remove the current manual kernel management.
If you had a machine that needed to stay on 5,15 than you still can do so but most wouldn’t need to hence why this a great feature to automate through the package manager just like Fedora workstation, Ubuntu and even Arch already does now and have since the start. The best part is you can use it or you can continue to install and use kernels manually so it the best of both words for advanced, novice or people who are even advanced who don’t want to think about it
This may be.
But I dont use commonality for metrics.
…or else I’d be using apt instead of pacman.
I still think that the scenario of a machine working perfectly with the current latest kernel as well as continuing to work perfectly with every subsequent release, on top of this automation being desirable for the majority of users … is a lot less likely than you seem to beileve.
Go ahead. Make some pkgbuilds for linux-lts and linux-latest … its not very difficult.
If you did you would actually know that more people use pacman than apt with Manjaro being number 4 on distro watch and EndeavourOS being number two for example.
That is why the manual kernel option would exist if you did run into a issue but only really old machines would have this issue not newer or current systems.
That’s a really bad recommendation, not only would that defeat the whole purpose of stability and streamlining the experience, it would also cause even more breakage relying on a AUR package for your kernels not to mention break support for Manjaro’s kernel modules…
The idea that there are more arch+manjaro+endeavor users then ubuntu+debian+mint+etc … seems pretty far fetched to me … nevermind the innate problems of using distrowatch as some kind of metric.
This is a silly discussion. It seems you want to argue to argue. I do not. Cheers.
As the topic title goes along the line of simplify I have to say
it cannot be made more simple than it is today.
ISO comes with current LTS
If user want’s to use stable mainline - they install using mhwd-kernel or the GUI
Either way the package manager will keep the installed kernels current.
Only users which have opted to install a mainline kernel will need to watch out for mainline becoming EOL and they will have enough education to know they need to act when that kernel goes EOL.
How much simpler can it be?
I think @megavolt has got the picture right. What this is about - besides the personal viewpoint - would complicate kernel management for the distribution maintainers - with no immediate benefit for endusers - so that is likely not going to happen - at least not today.
It only takes a search and a quick glance at the topics returned to realize that the current kernel management is the one which is creating less trouble.
It was more of a example to what you said, back in the day most people used Ubuntu based distro way more but these days more people are using either Ubuntu based, Fedora or Arch based distros
Checked how? WIth x-rays? They are exactly the same packages, so stop dreaming.
Huh? Your point was that it’s “a lot more of a setup”, so your reply makes no sense. It’s up down and enter basically. If “average” user can’t do that, then he shouldn’t do calamares GUI install either.
You are the one who isn’t understanding it. It’s same package management, so maintaining is exactly the same. If “average” user can’t maintain arch, then he shouldn’t be using manjaro either. Getting it now?
Are you just replying with something for the sake of replying?
Usually packages start in AUR and if they are good and useful and used a lot they are moved to repo. So take your energy and typing and concentrate it into doing the work you want others to do.
Yes they are the same other than maybe some patches etc but with the slightly slower update cycle they get tested etc to insure they aren’t releasing a problematic package while Arch is more bleeding edge with a bit less quality check and more faster on releases. Why are you being so rude lmao, settle down with the insults champ.
Are you really going to expect a new user to know how to use or understand archinstall script even if yes it is easier not to mention not feel overwhelmed by a terminal based graphical installer compared to a easier graphical installer even tho it’s to different? of course they would and would rather use the graphical installer.
I didn’t say they couldn’t, this is just a proposition to improve on it but compared to Arch that can use linux-lts and linux-latest is easier and not the same since you need to use a graphical kernel manager tool. Even tho Arch can do this it’s a shame that we can’t on Manjaro. That is all I am going to say.
Nope but why are you acting childish and rude? are you doing it for the sake of it instead of having a adult conversation on a idea
That is true some do and who says I don’t? I do a lot of contributions on Manjaro and many other projects to report bug and improve things, all I see you doing is bring bad energy to the conversation of a idea and being rude. I know what woek I do so what do you do to contribute to Manjaro and other projects? you can check my Gitlab and Github account history.
Apparently inexperienced users can easily fix their non-booting system and then switch kernels, so why do we need to hide kernels from them in the first place?
Sure they can but this was never about hiding kernels or removing a feature, if you read through my replies it’s a idea to work on the current frameworks we have to improve the UI and over all OS usability, not to say it isn’t user friendly or unusable but again to improve on it.
The proposition was to give users two simple kernel branches that their OS can follow and automatically be managed but the distros packages and mhwd-kernel respectively.
I didn’t say it was your aim, but that is what you’re proposing to some extent. Hiding things, so that people are less likely to seek out information. Trying to simplify hides the complexity. Not that it’s very complex, it’s actually pretty simple and easy to use.
You missed the main point, this will cause problems. If they can switch kernels then why do we need to automate it? Especially when we know it’ll break things.
If they manually switch, every few years, then they’re prepared for issues and are better able to handle them. Doing it automatically means they’re not prepared and don’t know why their OS suddenly broke.
Just because a newer kernel exists doesn’t mean we have to use it. We can’t possibly account for every situation so it’s best left to the admin. Then there’s the breakage that would happen.
Guess you won’t ever get it… 95% of packages are the exact same ones. You can check who the packager is.
Hope you don’t get PTSD and life-long trauma. Life really is tough nowadays.
What does that even mean? Do you expect new users to really understand Calamares?
My point is the average I-know-it-all noob should start with something else.
You don’t even know what rude is.
Here you go:
I call spade a spade. Also I bring bad energy.
No need, I trust your words.
But for real, you were told numerous times now how it is, but you just aren’t willing to accept it.
If I were you I’d ask devs what was wrong with kernel meta packages and then do some work to improve that.
Well no more like move it to another screen/option for advanced users to simplify it for users while still being advanced.
I am aware, we’ve already gone thought with this on the post but what I wanted to track down and discuss was why exactly but all I have gotten was it caused issues with people and I have left it at that.
Your right you don’t but I never said about using mainline over LTS
But I do get it and clearly you don’t, yes the packages are mostly the same but the difference like I said was the time of it still being tested before being pushing out the package update on Manjaro compared to Arch.
Ahaha nah but boy you sound like your having a tough time bud, have a cry
Yes and they do because it’s a easier to follow graphical application that wont intimidate a new user compared to a terminal one.
Don’t you threaten me with a good time
Here you go: oh wait you’ve done nothing here except be mad and hostile, why don’t you use tha tsame energy to do something productive mate
We can tell, you also brought that stinky diaper and bad attitude with you and did nothing productive to the conversation.
No it’s called have a discussion, I’m sorry you have short attention span and not mature enough to talk about an issue or how to solve, unlike you I want to actually help improve and give ideas on what we could do.
Join a party and become a politician. Then you can invent some bogus project every year, badly define what the goals are and what you expect out of it and then shift all the work to institutions the project is aimed for.
And while they try scraping together something half useful from your shi*ty guidelines you can already start patting yourself on the back and writing another line on your CV. And if anyone argues against anything in it (the project), you just have to argue back with some nonsensical replies.
Man, you’d be perfect. And you’re welcome. (for finding you your dream job)
This is all from me. But I do fully expect you to write a reply.
Sounds like a cool story mate, maybe you should do that instead and take that same energy to do something productive as a politician since like them you act like you know what you are talking about but did nothing in reality or maybe just join the circus, you would be a great depressed clown
