Call for testing: `stable` branch for Bluefin/Aurora

Bluefin
21

@j0rge hi, where is Bluefin stable download link? Has is disappeared?
If stable is stable as daily driver, why not also put download link on Bluefin website?
GTS is a version behind. Now stable is probably my all-time-favorite, after your announcement.

22

Yea we haven’t added it to the website yet, links are listed here:

23

If you are looking for a comparison of channels :

If you want to ask more about the differences between : Differences between Channels

24

I tested the stable channel since ~ 1 hour after it released, mainly because I have a bad bandwidth so weekly upgrades were more sustainable than daily ones

No issue since them
Elegantly answer all the specifications listed in its documentation : Administrator's Guide

I would probably switch back to the latest channel when zstd:chunked will be available (as it would probably drastically reduce update size + fsync kernel features the Lenovo Legion patch which I need)

25

Just providing a note that some of us Aurora users were using Aurora Stable and got a missing GRUB config. I don’t know if it Stable actually impacted anything compared to Latest.

I could not fix mine so will reinstall probably after Fedora 41. Sadly back on Windows.

26

Did someone file an issue?

27

Interesting. Where do I find out the info

29
30

I did not, and my best attempt looking at others, they did not as well.

I still can’t tell if it is my screw up as I originally did a sudo bootupctl update and everything was fine after rebooting. A few days later I then overlayed packages. A little bit after this I noticed the below issue from Travier. (Thus I don’t feel comfortable filing an issue for Universal Blue from my perspective.)

Apparently it did look like Bluefin and Aurora had trouble, although maybe they updated their bootloader as well.

31

What led you to run this command? It’s hard to tell from the linked thread what is happening because no one is posting any logs. The fedora issue is for migrating to F41 so I don’t think it’s that.

32

Well…because I’m a noob. :grinning:

I recently heard that Microsoft had issued an update that broke people dual booting on an old GRUB although I believe it was isolated to Secure Boot. (I do not use this.)

I wanted to have the latest GRUB in the event I had to reboot to Windows and it messed up my system, so I followed the following Fedora doc.
(Again it worked fine for a bit.)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FedoraSilverblueBootupd

Relooking at #5 from the below, this must have been my issue although I’m not sure about others in that conversation. (I was trying to overlay packages to test building a flatpak from an rpm package.)

33

See my earlier post above. But since Stable is built off of CoreOS, maybe it contained bootupd. I can’t remember if I tried to update my bootloader before I moved from “Latest” to “Stable”.

It just seemed like this command was recently introduced and I was able to utilize it. For me its not a big deal, as I’ll reinstall soon!

34

For anything bootc related I would err on the side of waiting for the Aurora and Bluefin team to make the change. It’s being actively developed on the Fedora side, therefore I don’t think uBlue is following as closely with those features. I believe that bootupd will come with Fedora 41, so it will be about a month before that’s something we would be able to use. When it comes to bootc in general I think that’s further down the line despite it being available in images today.

Hope that helps!