I don’t necessarily have to update my Arch distribution whenever there are new updates available
Clearly, op agrees
Comment on Pray for me lads, Imma about to rawdog this without back ups
Classy@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
Maybe I’m just screaming into the void here, but does it seem like, as a person who is still relatively out of touch with linux, I don’t necessarily have to update my Arch distribution whenever there are new updates available? I could theoretically just go on downloading new programs, uninstalling old ones, using everything as it sits until theoretically something breaks?
doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 weeks ago
__Lost__@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 weeks ago
You should always run a full upgrade when installing a new package to make sure your versions are all in sync. Like if your new package is looking for version 1.1 and you have 1.0 installed, the new package won’t work. In general, everything should be installed with ‘pacman -Syu’ not just ‘pacman -S’
If you don’t install any new packages, then no you don’t need to upgrade anything. You’re just missing out on security patches and upgraded features. It’s worth running occasional upgrades.
vox@sopuli.xyz 5 weeks ago
pacman -S without update is safe and will just install a version that was in the repos at the time you last dis an update. stuff gets removed from repos after like a month though…
azvasKvklenko@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
Iirc, the Arch wiki says you should synchronize all packages while adding new ones, and it’s technically unsupported. It might work in some cases, but personally I didn’t have to do much to not be able to launch something because symbols missing in libraries or no such file altogether. To avoid problems it’s better to sync packages fully at least once in a while.
Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
You’ll run into security and stability problems if you put it off for too long.