this post was submitted on 26 Dec 2025
287 points (99.3% liked)

Linux

10798 readers
702 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kopasz7@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Rolling distros also only update when you tell them. It is the user who is pulling the trigger on the footgun in both cases.

I'd say the main difference is that arch users are more trigger-happy about being up to date.

Also, I think pacman should at least warn you if the problem is enough to warrant a post on the arch website.

[–] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Sorta, but you run one command to update everything at once, and even though the system knows what GPU you have it still seems to update the driver to one thats not compatible, instead of holding that update back.

Also if it didn't warn the user when updating, the user had no idea they were pulling any trigger, especially when Linux falls back to CLI after this instead of just falling back to a basic driver.

[–] kopasz7@sh.itjust.works 1 points 33 minutes ago

What you described is what happaned with arch. The transitioning shouldn't have happened this way, IMO.

Other distros usually don't send their users to TTY after an update if they can help it.

On the long term, the situation is the same on linux and windows: you choose the latest driver and live with that given feature set and its bugs.