Upgrading MX a Simple Method?

[limotux]

May I ask why do users need to do all the procedures shown here https://mxlinux.org/wiki/upgrading-from ... nstalling/

Renaming, editing,... etc.

What if we simply name the repos of the "current' distro MX21 for example just "current" not "buster" not "bullseye" not whatever it is called. Just call it "current".

Whenever there is a new distro/version/release just copy the new stuff to the repo called "current" so the upgrade will be done simply as a normal update without the need to go through all the steps of editing, copying. backing up....

I am not interfering with the developers business, you are doing a great job and a great distro.
I am just always thinking about newbies, the average Joe, who just need a system that runs to browse, listen to music, use a word processor, spreadsheet,... just the normal day to day use without the need to do any technical stuff.

Why should we go through several steps if it can be just "current" repository?

[SwampRabbit]

Pretty much the same reason Debian and any non-rolling Distro doesn’t do this.

It would force all users to upgrade, some may not want to. Such an upgrade may break packages, for example many GTK2 and python2 applications are no longer in any newer Distros, some users still use these. Some users with older systems may actually be worse off with newer versions until they update their hardware.

[asqwerth]

Yep. It's not a simple upgrade at all. Newbies won't appreciate it. And you'll get lots of users up in arms about the enforced changes. Eg. removal of their favourite applications.

Why don't you run a Debian Testing (eg Sparky) or Sid (Eg Siduction) distro as a trial? They work like how you describe in your OP. You'll have a better idea how such a distro works and if you like it.

[limotux]

Pretty much the same reason Debian and any non-rolling Distro doesn’t do this.

It would force all users to upgrade, some may not want to. Such an upgrade may break packages, for example many GTK2 and python2 applications are no longer in any newer Distros, some users still use these. Some users with older systems may actually be worse off with newer versions until they update their hardware.

It would force all users to upgrade: I don't think users will not want to upgrade. Normally everybody want the latest. Do a voting perhaps and see the results.
older systems may actually be worse off with newer versions until they update their hardware: MX detects hardware.. so no problem. It can be sorted out.
Ok, in any case it will only "update" if it fulfills requirements.

[limotux]

Yep. It's not a simple upgrade at all. Newbies won't appreciate it. And you'll get lots of users up in arms about the enforced changes. Eg. removal of their favourite applications.

Why don't you run a Debian Testing (eg Sparky) or Sid (Eg Siduction) distro as a trial? They work like how you describe in your OP. You'll have a better idea how such a distro works and if you like it.

removal of their favourite applications. : Does an update remove applications? it either updates or not!

Why don't you run a Debian Testing : because I prefer stability and usability. Not necessary the "bleeding" edge with all the blood and mess!

Anyway, there are already rolling distros, why not have a rolling MX but with well tested stable software.
P.S. In my distro hopping I enjoyed Artix and PCLinux. The difference Artix is "bleeding" edge, towards the more experienced users.
PCLinux is newbie and user friendly, rolling but a bit slower and better tested... but "rolling"

I think in general anybody would prefer NOT to reinstall, and better automagically have the latest without reinstalling!

I would suggest developers should make a voting:
- I need "bleeding" edge, don't care about stability.
- I prefer rolling but stable.
- I prefer to go through all procedures shown on web site.
- I prefer a fresh install with every release.

This can give idea about what users really want.
I would suggest same voting be done here to get idea about MX users prefferences and at https://www.linux.org/forums/ to get an idea about what Linux users in general (whatever distro) prefferences.

I don't think the concept of a rolling release is a bad idea. Some distros already have it and have their "clients", why not/can't MX?
My issue is that I see MX much better and very user friendly and hope it can be much better hopefully with a rolling release but not "bleading edge" a bit slower or even once in a year or more with a new release.

I would suggest doing two polls as I mentioned above here and on https://www.linux.org/forums/

That's all.

Thanks.

[Eadwine Rose]

No.

[asqwerth]

MX as rolling? Not going to happen. We are based on Debian Stable. You want gentle rolling, you'll have to find another distro based on that premise.

Who's going to oversee, test and curate the numerous changes and updates that change the nature of Debian stable (with its huge number of packages in its repos) without it losing stability and becoming like Debian Testing? What manpower? **

Your suggestion is exactly like reading posts on the Manjaro forum asking that the developers create a fixed, non-rolling version of manjaro, even though Manjaro is\ based on Arch (not joking, this is real and such posts have popped up once in a while).

I think you need to understand the base/nature of the distro you seek to change.


**Note: Solydxk started as a curated/controlled Debian Testing around 2012/2013 [at least that's when I started using it]. They would hold back updates, test them and then then release a 'pack' of accumulated updates once a month. In theory, you would get a debian-based distro with fresh packages, but checked/tested first to ensure stability.

In practice, those updates were never completely stable for some users, still required hands-on intervention on occasion (so users had to check the forum in advance or seek help after their system had messed up) and the huge demands it took out of the devs (in testing packages and providing support after an update pack was released) caused the update packs to get delayed longer and longer (meaning each pack got larger, which has its own problems) and eventually led to official Solydxk being only Debian Stable.

[Jerry3904]

Excellent post, asqwerth!

[limotux]

MX as rolling? Not going to happen. We are based on Debian Stable. You want gentle rolling, you'll have to find another distro based on that premise.

Who's going to oversee, test and curate the numerous changes and updates that change the nature of Debian stable (with its huge number of packages in its repos) without it losing stability and becoming like Debian Testing? What manpower? **

Your suggestion is exactly like reading posts on the Manjaro forum asking that the developers create a fixed, non-rolling version of manjaro, even though Manjaro is\ based on Arch (not joking, this is real and such posts have popped up once in a while).

I think you need to understand the base/nature of the distro you seek to change.


**Note: Solydxk started as a curated/controlled Debian Testing around 2012/2013 [at least that's when I started using it]. They would hold back updates, test them and then then release a 'pack' of accumulated updates once a month. In theory, you would get a debian-based distro with fresh packages, but checked/tested first to ensure stability.

In practice, those updates were never completely stable for some users, still required hands-on intervention on occasion (so users had to check the forum in advance or seek help after their system had messed up) and the huge demands it took out of the devs (in testing packages and providing support after an update pack was released) caused the update packs to get delayed longer and longer (meaning each pack got larger, which has its own problems) and eventually led to official Solydxk being only Debian Stable.

Thanks asqwerth for clarification.

I assure you I do NOT want to CHANGE MX to be a rolling release. I didn't mention this at all.

All what I am saying is about making upgrades just more simple for newbies and average Joe.

Maybe somehow download -> bootable USB -> Install (while install does everything shown in the link, keep installed software. configuration, user data... etc) then an update after the install will update the already installed software.

This would be fine as well. I am not talking about changing MX to a rolling release.

[Richard]

I realize you didn't actually say rolling release but that is what is meant by your explanation.
Many of us thought similarly before actually running for a while in that manner some of these
that are mentioned in the 2nd link below: Arch, Manjaro, Tumbleweed, Solus, Gentoo, Saybayon,
EndeavorOS, Black Arch, Arch Labs & Reborn.

Some definitions:
https://linuxiac.com/what-is-rolling-re ... -using-it/

https://www.tecmint.com%2Fbest-rolling-release-linux-distributions%2F&usg=AOvVaw2g-Ga41jE36C2h8S4pseyq

https://www.tecmint.com/best-linux-dist ... beginners/

The answer relies on actual experience running and maintaining a rolling release, as SwampRabbit, asqwerth & Eadwine Rose so eloquently explained. It is fun for a while until you realize that you are waiting until Friday to do the update to have the weekend to be able to get back to work when things turn pear-shaped. MX & antiX have the Snapshot program to create a current bootable live USB; something that I only dreamed of when an update broke my rolling system.

That is why I use MX Linux. It is based on Debian Stable with stable backports, MX-Snapshot, LUM & MX-Tools.

Manjaro is a good place to learn a lot about Linux although there is a learning curve. I'm always surprised when I see it included in Beginner distros and it will give you a good foundation in Linux things.

Experience is a great teacher.