Okay but jokes aside, how many users actually have issues with that? So far it never broke anything for me, even when it apparently should have, according to a forum post I only read several weeks late, after finally noticing the intervention required tag
1 year on current Arch install and have yet to have a issue
I have installed arch on my work laptop two years ago now and I have never had a problem with it booting, logging in or functioning. Never as in not once. I do update it periodically and every time it just fucking works.
I used debian at a desktop at another work and the desktop had an nvidia card in it. Every time apt said “nvidia” the computer booted in single user mode or kernel panic.
Yeah the only issues I've had with Arch, were due to me being a dumbass.
The faulty GRUB patch was a widespread issue. Syu -> reboot -> fail to boot. It was especially annoyng since you couldn't just rollback like with any other faulty arch update.
Besides that, during the 2-3 years I mained it, I've had Arch often fail to boot after updating it for the first time in a few weeks. And on endeavour the update script gave up one day, and so I had to remember to manually mkinitcpio or it would fail to boot.
I've switched from Arch to Fedora about a decade ago, never had this issue with either. Actually I probably never had this issue with GRUB at all, maybe with LILO...
Happened once around two years ago, s botched update from mainstream or something like that. Made me learn systemd boot which is simple and never EVER use grub again
Perhaps this is on me, but I've had issues with Windows monkeying with GRUB on dual-boot the first year or so I transitioned to Linux. Finally moved to systemd-boot and haven't looked back since.
The intervention last year was only required if the grub package was updated and generated a config the older bootloader didn't understand. You would have been fine either way as long as you didn't generate a new config. I ignore grub updates now because I was caught with my setup.
I've been using Arch for like 10 years and I never really have any issues. My biggest issue is with the ZFS module, but I solved that by using the LTS kernel.
I did but that's totally on me for writing stuff and forgetting it directly in /boot/grub/grub.cfg
It's happened to me 2x in 20 years of Linux usage. First time was my fault.
Why is anyone still using grub? This is on you at this point
Because it's the one that supports the most setups, like LUKS and LVM (on the root partition)
which bootloader can't do this? EFISTUB, systemd-boot and rEFInd can
Gotcha
What if I like grubbing around? What if I like when updates give me hell?
you guys use GRUB lol
Doesn't everyone just boot by entering machine code with the switch panel in the front?
This has never happened to me, well at least not yet. The only thing that's ballsed up recently is Nvidia drivers....
Latest kernel update restarted my session (closing all programs, including my terminal) before mkinitcpio, easy fix, but yeah, did require live boot media.
I can see how that would be problematic. Hopefully that'll never happen to me....
Lauths in timeshift and rEFInd.
Indeed. UKIs are the way.
Tumbleweed and Mint offer Snapper Rollback configured by default, available from the Grub menu. And that's friggin' noïce.
I'm more of a First World Anarchist myself, I only ever rescue my os-breaking, Arch-is-botched mistakes with a Live Ubuntu thumbdrive.
Would not have happened with systemd-boot
Didnt had any boot related issues since I moved to systemd-boot, even secureboot functions very well with it...
The manga (少年のアビス) is a banger
