Relative merits of Tumbleweed and upgrading version

English Install/Boot/Login
#1

Hello. I have been using a half-rolling release distro for some years and I would like to achieve the same effect with OpenSuse, that is, avoid having to reinstall when a new version is released.

For OpenSuse there seem to be two choices:

  1. Tumbleweed
  2. Move the /home folder to a separate partition and use the upgrade option when a new release is issued.

From what I have read, the latter seems to be the least problematic. I would like, however, to hear from users familiar with this distro as I have only recently installed OpenSuse 12.3.

#2

I am not too familiar with using Tumbleweed, though I can speak for the merits of a ‘stable’ release type. You can be sure to have a static set of packages for the most part until your release in particular reaches end of life. Only then do you pretty much have to upgrade. This means you can pick and choose the moment of disruption, rather than potentially have a constant stream of newer software (example, what if all of a sudden a new version of gnome shell deprecates a feature you relied on?).

As for the home folder, I actually keep my data (not home) on a separate partition mounted at /mnt/data, which I symlink the Documents, Music, and etc into /home/myuser. This means if I choose to reinstall, I can do so fresh without any personal data loss or disruption. For this reinstall all I need to do is create simple tar backups to keep any configuration located in my home folder (such as .mozilla). An upgrade will not delete the data obviously, but I reinstall more often than upgrade.

#3

I prefer retain /home in a separate partition and re-install the rest. You also have “zypper dup”
Links
https://en.opensuse.org/SDB:Offline_upgrade
https://en.opensuse.org/SDB:System_upgrade

#4

I keep “/home” as a separate partition. For a new release, I do a clean install but keep the same “/home” (which I do not reformat). I have found this quite reliable.

At present, I am trying Tumbleweed. However, I am not trying it on my primary machine. So I am using it as a way of exploring new software, new desktop releases, etc. But it won’t affect stability for me, since it is not on my primary system.

#5

Thanks for the replies. I have looked at the links mentioned and have bookmarked them.

For the time being I’ll move my /home folder to another partition as soon as I find out how to do that.

#6

I keep 2 root partitions and rotate them for each version. I install in the unused one and don’t mount the home partition and test the new version when I’m satisfied it is stable I rename the /home directory which is still in the new root and mount my normal home partition. The old root now becomes my spare. I generally don’t move to each new version but skip one or two.

#7

Moving the /home folder is simple enough. The tricky thing for me is finding a way of mounting that automatically so that I can log in.

Meanwhile, I have had second thoughts. It is simple enough to back up the ~ folder as someone mentioned above. I’ll have to check my user id to see whether I can restore the backup as user in another system.

#8

two clues


cat /etc/fstab
man fstab
#9

And YaST > System > Partitioning so you see all possibilities and letYaST take care of all the details.

#10

On 2013-04-25 03:06, ender21 wrote:
> 1. Tumbleweed
> 2. Move the /home folder to a separate partition and use the upgrade
> option when a new release is issued.

Notice that for a “system upgrade” you do not /need/ a separate /home
partition, because an upgrade does not format partitions, it basically
just upgrades packages.

Online upgrade
method
Offline upgrade
method
Chapter 16. Upgrading the System and System Changes

However, a separate /home gives you more options. You can install fresh,
keeping the home (and thus your user files) intact. Or you can install
into a secondary root partition, try both old and new versions, and then
choose one. Of course, on these two methods you have to redo your system
configs. If you have databases, webservers, mailservers, and such, they
don’t keep.

Another variation, useful with two roots, is having a separate /data
partition where Documents and such are saved for both, while /home
itself only contains smallish config files. Or you can have two roots,
two homes, and a data…

There are as many methods as people :wink:

As for tumbleweed, notice that you are doing upgrades every week or
month, depending how active the development is. Further more, when there
is a new stable release, like 12.3, the base repository for Tunblewwed,
named “current”, changes the symlink in the server from pointing to 12.2
to pointing to 12.3, so suddenly one day you are in fact doing an
upgrade to 12.3 at a time of their choosing. In fact, on this phase you
can get some regressions.

Tumbleweed users are very happy (with some grumblings that particular
day of new users), so it is a good thing.

Choose what you prefer :slight_smile:

–
Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 12.1 x86_64 “Asparagus” at Telcontar)

#11

Many thanks. Thanks also for the reference to fstab. I couldn’t find it previously and think I may have been looking for a folder instead of a file.
>:(

#12

I don’t know why but they should have added a “.conf” or something at end so that run of the mill users can easily identify it as a file instead of a folder.

#13

rotfl!rotfl!
/etc/fstab is allready named like that for more then 40 years. And every system manager knows it like that and where it is for. The habit (I am not sure if it is a good or a bad one) to add a sort of file type abreviation preceded by a dot at the end of file names (so that people get a hint about what it is) is much, much younger.

#14

That might be the case but for any run of the mill users from other OSes it is directory just like man refers to a human and not manual.
Let me tell you a tale of a property(.myprofile) file used by a jar(java) to read certain settings on openSUSE
When i tried to create a similar file in Win 7,it simply refused to create files with no prefix before a dot(.) or i cannot right click create a new file and name it “.myprofile” on a MsWorks system.

#15

There is but one answer to this: “Linux is not Windows”. You better forget everything that you thought that it “should be like that on computers”. And it is of no use explaining me how something works or did not work on MSwhatever, because I skipped that, going straight from Unixes to Linux (which is thus for me just another Unix). I know not everybody is that blessed, but that is how it is.

#16

Am 27.04.2013 10:56, schrieb vazhavandan:
> When i tried to create a similar file in Win 7,it simply refused to
> create files with no prefix before a dot(.) or i cannot right click
> create a new file and name it “.myprofile” on a MsWorks system.
>
That is not a limitation of the operating system but a limitation in
windows explorer which tries to be more clever than the user to not
allow that.
You can easily create a file or directory .xxxxx from the command line
in windows.

–
PC: oS 12.3 x86_64 | i7-2600@3.40GHz | 16GB | KDE 4.10.2 | GTX 650 Ti
ThinkPad E320: oS 12.3 x86_64 | i3@2.30GHz | 8GB | KDE 4.10.2 | HD 3000
HannsBook: oS 12.3 x86_64 | SU4100@1.3GHz | 2GB | KDE 4.10.2 | GMA4500

#17

Yeah i did realise that too as i could download a file with “.xxx” onto MS without any issue but when i tried to create it manually i couldn’t. File system supports but windows doesn’t want to support :frowning:

#18

On 2013-04-27 14:26, vazhavandan wrote:
> Yeah i did realise that too as i could download a file with “.xxx” onto
> MS without any issue but when i tried to create it manually i couldn’t.
> File system supports but windows doesn’t want to support :frowning:

It just means that programmers are probably using their own validation
rules, or in the libraries they use from their programming environments.
The alternative is for them to attempt to create the file, then get an
error from the system that they have to handle graciously, or get a pass.

–
Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 12.1 x86_64 “Asparagus” at Telcontar)

#19

On 04/27/2013 04:26 AM, hcvv pecked at the keyboard and wrote:
> vazhavandan;2551568 Wrote:
>> I don’t know why but they should have added a “.conf” or something at
>> end so that run of the mill users can easily identify it as a file
>> instead of a folder.
> rotfl!rotfl!
> /etc/fstab is allready named like that for more then 40 years. And
> every system manager knows it like that and where it is for. The habit
> (I am not sure if it is a good or a bad one) to add a sort of file type
> abreviation preceded by a dot at the end of file names (so that people
> get a hint about what it is) is much, much younger.
>
>

Agreed, the file type is determined by the contents not by some
arbitrary extension. If you need to have extensions on files you need to
go back to DOS/Windows to fulfill your needs.

#20

One of the advantages I learned moving from Win to linux was the flexibility on file names, and the content derived file type.