With the return of Linux metapackages, such as linux-meta, will we see the return of linux-latest and linux-lts?
I seem to have been proven correct, that allowing users to remain on unsupported kernels is ultimately more detrimental than updating them automatically.
The solution to topic from 3 years ago still stands:
linux-meta is a good safety-net to help new users that do not yet understand what an EOL kernel is or how to manage Manjaro Kernels
I asked about testing this metapackage recently and was advised that it was not needed
So there should be very few problems for new users when kernel 6.10 an 6.11 are dropped
and 6.12 becomes the new LTS kernel
I don’t understand how the logic of “some users who don’t understand kernels need help when theirs goes EOL”, and “automatically updating kernels causes issues” can not conflict with one another.
The latter is why the previous metapackages were removed. But now, we’re saying no we need to help the user, and forcibly update their kernel, so that they don’t remain on an old kernel.
That doesn’t make any sense. Using the previous argument for the elimination of linux-latest and linux-lts, how does linux-meta ensure that the kernel update isn’t going to break the user’s machine? You can’t make one argument in one place, and proceed to go against your own argument somewhere else.
Don’t get me wrong, I approve of automatically upgrading people’s kernels. I think the previous metapackages should never have been removed. But this just seems like they can’t admit that they were wrong.
There could be a potential issue with kernels being automatically upgraded if it’s like e.g. Mint does it, though.
They don’t automatically remove the previous kernels in the same series so if, like me, you have a separate /boot partition¹ (and with those enormous Ubuntu kernels) you can be dealing with a full partition before you know it.
¹ I have separate /boot as it helps me to keep things tidy², instead of forgetting and ending up filling / with obsolete, forgotten-about Kernels!
² Fat chance
Previous metapackages were removed because they “created a heap of other issues”
EOL kernels are not a problem. Previous issues were reported by users when kernel v6.9 went beyond End Of Life and was dropped from Manjaro repositories. Most of the issues reported a failure to update. Issues were resolved by helping new users to use Manjaro GUI or CLI tools to manage kernels
If linux-meta works as expected when kernel v6.10 is dropped, there should be fewer users reporting problems in update topics
Manjaro already has manjaro-settings-manager-notifier to notify users when kernels are unsupported or new kernels are available. and most users can use Manjaro Settings Manager GUI and mhwd-kernel to manage kernels
If a user prefers an LTS kernel there are minimal ISOs available with LTS kernels v6.6 and v6.1 rather than latest kernel
But it still ends up doing a very similar thing to the previous metapackages. It automates the upgrade of the kernel, when a kernel is dropped. Presumably when 6.10 is dropped, linux-meta will then point to 6.11 right? And it will then install kernel 6.11 onto users’ machines. That’s exactly what the previous metapackages did.
This linux-meta package might do it at a different point in time than the previous metapackages did, but it still does the same action.
So I don’t understand how the previous argument can hold for automating kernel upgrades, but not now for this metapackage.
Is the argument that users for some reason won’t “flame the packager and distribution” for breaking your system due to a kernel change because linux-meta only updates the kernel when one goes EOL, and by then the next kernel should theoretically be mature?
The old meta packages would update regardless.
This meta package - I don’t like it, and don’t think it is ideal - but it is better than the alternative where
linux-meta v6.11 has been released to Unstable and Testing branches recently
PKGBUILD shows metapackage will replace any kernel that is no longer available from Manjaro core repository - kernel v4.8 to kernel v6.10
PKGBUILD · Packages / core / linux-meta · GitLab
Manjaro Stable branch is using linux-meta v6.10 - to replace any kernel that is no longer available for Stable branch - kernel v4.8 to kernel v6.9
[pkg-upd] 6.10-2 (f524bdad) Packages / linux-meta · GitLab
Most users will not need this metapackage if they know how to use other Manjaro tools to manage kernels, or read forum announcements
As long as these metapackages don’t become compulsory on Manjaro, I have no problem with this. I have a 10 year old machine so I have no need for the latest kernel series. I’m still on LTS kernel 6.1. I don’t want or need a LTS metapackage to automatically move me to the next LTS when it’s out. I want the choice to install, or not, the next LTS at my own leisure.
They are compulsory for anyone running a sync/upgrade that has an EOL kernel listed in the _eol array, which then becomes the conflicts and replaces arrays.
So, ex, if you are on Unstable right now and have kernel 6.4, and update … you will end up with linux-meta installed, replacing linux64.
Though this can technically be circumvented by using IgnorePkg or similar … so its not entirely locked in.
LTS kernels 6.1 and 6.6 should be supported until Dec 2026
Active kernel releases - The Linux Kernel Archives
linux-meta 6.11 in Unstable branch would install linux611 to replace any unsupported kernel
Topic moved from Feature Request to Non-technical Questions as nothing was requested. It seems the discussion has run its course.
Please create a new thread for any further questions or concerns.