this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2025
23 points (87.1% liked)

Linux

58675 readers
543 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml
nooter692@lemmy.ml
MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml
cypherpunks@lemmy.ml
cyclohexane@lemmy.ml
d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
23
Do not update single packages on Archlinux, but (beehaw.org)
submitted 2 days ago by thingsiplay@beehaw.org to c/linux@lemmy.ml
42 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

On Archlinux it is not recommended to update only one package with the package manager pacman. Let's say I have 11 packages, and one of them is extra/firefox (true story). Updating only a pacman -S firefox could introduce problems, but installing a new single package if it wasn't there is okay.

So my question is, could we get around this by removing and installing the same package again in one go: pacman -Rs firefox && pacman -S firefox

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

but installing a new single package if it wasn’t there is okay.

Not true. It says clearly "Partial upgrades are not supported". Whether the package was there or not is irrelevant. And I really don't mean this personally, but as general advice, using Archlinux and its wiki requires a modicum of independent thinking.

edit: clarification:

It is OK to use '-S' only if all installed packages are on the same level as the local package info. That is assuming that the cached local version of the package is still available on package servers.

Also read https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/System_maintenance#Partial_upgrades_are_unsupported

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

But -S package is not upgrading the ~~package~~ (Edit: I meant system). Installing with that command is supported. That is NOT a partial upgrade of the system. -Sy package is considered a partial upgrade, because that command updates the package list.

And I really don’t mean this personally, but as general advice, using Archlinux and its wiki requires a modicum of independent thinking.

This part was a total unnecessary attack, for someone who asks. Especially if you are not entirely correct.

[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

It is OK to use '-S' only if all installed packages are on the same level as the local package info. That is assuming that the cached local version of the package is still available on package servers.

I just think you're being too literal about this, instead of thinking about the reasoning behind that rule.

[–] Strit@lemmy.linuxuserspace.show 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

But -S package is not upgrading the package. Installing with that command is supported. That is NOT a partial upgrade of the system. -Sy package is considered a partial upgrade, because that command updates the package list.

I disagree. The -S flag stands for "sync", which means sync the local version with the remote version. So if there is no local version it just installs the remote version. This is still a partial update, because any dependencies it might have, that you already have installed, might be the wrong version compared to the one the newly installed package expects.

pacman -S should be discouraged because of this. The correct one is pacman -Syu for installing new packages.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If you have not ran a database update (any y after -y), pacman will fetch the version that is compatible with your current installed dependencies. This is not a partial upgrade.

[–] Strit@lemmy.linuxuserspace.show 2 points 1 day ago

The remote server only has the latest version of the package, and the latest version is always built against the dependencies on the remote server. So if you didn't update the database, then your pacman -S command will fail, because it can't find the package version on the remote server. So you did not install anything.

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No, pacman -S package is safe. Because the package list is not updated this way, and therefore the system is not updated and nothing else is affected. New packages can be installed with this command, perfectly okay. That is in the spirit of Archlinux.

I think my idea would not work because the nature of the command -S package, as no new version would be synced. This is not a partial upgrade and it does not need to be discouraged.

[–] Strit@lemmy.linuxuserspace.show 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No, pacman -S package is safe. Because the package list is not updated this way, and therefore the system is not updated and nothing else is affected. New packages can be installed with this command, perfectly okay. That is in the spirit of Archlinux.

If the package is not in your cache, it needs to download it from the remote server first. The version on the remote server is built against the dependencies on the remote server. So if your local dependency is older, it will be a partial update!

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No, because pacman -S will use the current package list.

[–] Strit@lemmy.linuxuserspace.show 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

And where does it download the newly installed package from? It's not in your cache, because you haven't had it installed before and the remote server only has the newest version.

[–] Markaos@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 day ago

The download will simply fail if the version pacman wants to download isn't available on the mirror. The version is part of the download URL.

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 1 points 1 day ago

I guess that's the key takeaway for me from this post and replies.