• 0 Posts
  • 27 Comments
Joined 7 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 1st, 2024

help-circle
  • biribiri11@lemmy.mltoLinux@lemmy.mlDeduplication tool
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Tbf you did start your post with

    I’m in the process of starting a proper backup

    So you’re going to end up with at least a few people talking about how to onboard your existing backups into a proper backup solution (like borg). Your bullet points can certainly probably be organized into a shell script with sync, but why? A proper backup solution with a full backup history is going to be way more useful than dumping all your files into a directory and renaming in case something clobbers. I don’t see the point in doing anything other than tarring your old backups and using borg import-tar (docs). It feels like you’re trying to go from one half-baked, odd backup solution to another, instead of just going with a full, complete solution.



  • I think it’d also be good to document:

    Alpine and NixOS: both 6 months

    Minor releases of RHEL: 6 months

    Non LTS Ubuntu: 6 months

    The question also brings up Fedora rawhide. Fedora rawhide never has releases, though its version is always the current latest branched release (not necessarily stable/beta/alpha) + 1.

    Since the pace of development was also brought up:

    Fedora Rawhide and ELN (same package set) -> Fedora Stable after ~2-3 months of being “stabilized” (this stabilization period has periodic “freezes” which is why bad versions of XZ never made it into Fedora 40’s beta)

    Fedora Rawhide and ELN (same package set) -> CentOS Stream (currently unclear how long it takes to go from branched to full release, though it was branched months ago from ELN) -> RHEL every 6 months

    AlmaLinux releases are tagged from CentOS stream every 6 months, and patched with security updates. When a new version releases, the current minor release is immediately EOL’d, unlike RHEL. Rocky is the same. Both have extra support services from third parties. RHEL offers EUS releases for every other minor release (as of RHEL 9).

    It’s a common misconception that Fedora stable releases become CentOS Stream releases. This pattern was true pre-CentOS stream, but now, for the most part, CentOS Stream and Fedora stable might share a few patches at most, but their development timelines are different. They branch directly off the rolling Fedora Rawhide/ELN trunk.

    Debian unstable -> Debian testing (auto-promoted after 2 weeks iirc) -> Ubuntu stable or Debian stable




  • Am I wrong in assuming that both OS’s should be sharing the EFI and /boot partitions?

    Shared ESP is fine as long as you don’t run out of space. Nothing in /boot should conflict but that’s not guaranteed, although having 2 potential boot partitions means having 2 potential grub configs. I’d make sda3 a ~2GB ext4 boot partition just for Fedora (mounted at /boot), and an sda5 with btrfs with a home subvolume mounted at /home, and a root subvolume mounted at /, then mount sda1 at /boot/efi (this is the default layout iirc, albeit with different partitions, ofc). This might be easier to do in the advanced blivet gui.

    And yes, Linux’s boot process is a convoluted, fragile mess and there are currently multiple ongoing discussions on how to improve it.



  • I sometimes hear that it is a different story on servers.

    Wonder what their usages are, especially in a container-focused context, where most containers simply don’t have an init, and the base system just needs, at most, to have a container runtime (+/- a few other things, see: talos linux and their 130MB bare-metal ISOs).