Problems updating with limited disk space

Delete pacman's package cache.

Check how much room your logs and crash dumps are using.

Ya, I don't think that's feasible.

3 Likes

I had this error too once. Fixed it by limiting the timeshift snapshots to one or two. There should also be an option to limit the size of the pacman cache in Pamac.

You're lucky you didn't completely run out of disk pace and crash the system. In that case there is no way to recover unless you can chroot and delete some files.

Wow, that's pretty tight on space.

One option I would consider, depending on how deep your configuration is at this point, would be to do a fresh install. That way everything gets as up-to-date as possible, and you are starting off with the smallest image on the disk possible. Since you already are keeping your files on external storage, your sacrifice would be whatever configuration you have set up and whatever packages you have installed.

Honestly i would just completely disable btrfs snapshots and play the storage as close to the chest as possible, that way you can make sure you have space for the packages you need and updates and such. Again, since your files are not on the drive that's all the less at risk. Plus, as you mentioned it is not your primary machine.

I agree, that isn't going to work. Btrfs snapshots have to do with the btrfs subvolumes, so the only way it can work is with the snapshots going to the same drive as the data.

If you want to keep a backup handy and have a spare flash drive, I would set up a regular old full system back up with rsync and just run an update to it every once in a while.

I don't know whether crash dumps refers to core dumps from crashed programs or kernel crash dumps, and I couldn't find out where they might be stored, so I can't tell you how much space they might be using, sorry.

Assuming for the log files space that this is enough to report:

# du -sh /var/log/ /var/cache
390M	/var/log/
7.9G	/var/cache

Thanks for stopping me from trying to setup timeshift to use an alternate drive. (I considered that because timeshift suggests choosing an alternate location for storing the snapshots when the filesystem is low on space.)

After a pacman -S -c:

# pacman -S -c
Packages to keep:
  All locally installed packages

Cache directory: /var/cache/pacman/pkg/
:: Do you want to remove all other packages from cache? [Y/n] y
removing old packages from cache...

Database directory: /var/lib/pacman/
:: Do you want to remove unused repositories? [Y/n] y
removing unused sync repositories...
[[email protected] luke]# du -sh  /var/cache
4.7G	/var/cache
[[email protected] luke]# df -h
Filesystem      Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
dev             1.8G     0  1.8G   0% /dev
run             1.9G  1.9M  1.9G   1% /run
/dev/mmcblk0p5   29G   25G  3.8G  87% /

I'm trying the update again now that I have some more space...

Total Download Size:    786.55 MiB
Total Installed Size:  2378.52 MiB
Net Upgrade Size:       -15.60 MiB

:: Proceed with installation? [Y/n] y

I'll report back shortly...

Sorry for mu ignorance, I'm too new to archlinux and garuda.

I couldn't find way to limit timeshift snapshots: when I run the GUI it shows that scheduled snapshots are disabled, even though there were four snapshots (three now after I deleted one).

I also couldn't work out how to use pamac to limit the size of the pacman cache. :frowning:

Unless... man 5 pacman.conf mentions a KeepNumPackages, so I guess I could reduce that from 3 to 1, is that what you meant?

The idea of disabling btrfs snapshots sounds okay to me, for this laptop and usage.

But I didn't see how to do that just by reading the man pages for btrfs and timeshift, and reading How do I turn off automatic backup in Garuda Linux? - #2 by SGS didn't say where the timeshift documentation is, to read, to learn how to do it.

Sorry for being such a garuda noob.

The idea of a complete reinstall might be okay. Though I think it makes garuda less appealing than other linux distros that don't default to automated snapshots.

If I can learn how to turn them off, that may be okay though.

Thanks for your patience.

I had timeshift running in the background as I re-ran pacman -Syu, so it failed to take the snapshot at the end and told me to exit from it and try again.

It looked good, until:

( 71/100) upgrading linux-lts-headers                              [------------------------------------] 100%
error: could not extract /usr/lib/modules/5.10.90-1-lts/build/include/vdso/clocksource.h (Can't create '/usr/lib/modules/5.10.90-1-lts/build/include/vdso/clocksource.h')
error: could not extract /usr/lib/modules/5.10.90-1-lts/build/include/video/cirrus.h (Can't create '/usr/lib/modules/5.10.90-1-lts/build/include/video/cirrus.h')

...

error: could not extract /usr/lib/modules/5.10.90-1-lts/build/virt/lib/Kconfig (Can't create '/usr/lib/modules/5.10.90-1-lts/build/virt/lib/Kconfig')
error: could not extract /usr/lib/modules/5.10.90-1-lts/build/vmlinux (Write failed)
error: problem occurred while upgrading linux-lts-headers
error: could not open file /var/lib/pacman/local/linux-lts-headers-5.10.90-1/files: No space left on device
error: could not update database entry linux-lts-headers-5.10.90-1
error: could not commit transaction
error: failed to commit transaction (transaction aborted)
Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.
# df -h
Filesystem      Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
dev             1.8G     0  1.8G   0% /dev
run             1.9G  1.9M  1.9G   1% /run
/dev/mmcblk0p5   29G   27G     0 100% /

and

du -sh  /var/cache
5.4G	/var/cache

Looks like it almost succeeded, but did not have the space it needed.

Oh, and running timeshift again now shows I have no snapshots any more, even though I had not deleted them. (I did change the schedule to only have 1 snapshot for the monthly and weekly though, even though scheduling is turned off it said.)

Running pacman -S -c again hasn't recovered any space, unsurprisingly.

I'll see what I can uninstall so the system has a smidgin of space...

Just try running the update again.

It is possible to relocate your pacman cache to another drive (unlike snapshots). See the pacman documentation on the Arch Wiki if you're interested in doing this.

I tried uninstalling wps-office to recover 1.1GB of space. I tried via the add/remove software GUI but it failed.
I removed it via pacman -R wps-office which seemed to work, but didn't recover any space. Filesystem remained 100% used. Running add/remove software then couldn't remove anything as it complained wps-office was missing.
Then chrome browser crashed.

I think I tried pacman -Syu again but it didn't work.

Tried rebooting and it failed, saying the kernel was missing.

So I think I'll give up on Garuda. Too many things went wrong.

Thanks for your help. When I return home I'll see if I can install some other Linux distro to revive the laptop.

I'm very disappointed that just updating the system through the recommended means can lead to an unbootable machine. That seems the exact opposite of Garuda's supposed key benefit.

Anyway, good luck for your future development.

The issue was not that Garuda is unreliable, the problem was that your drive space was too limited. By removing your snapshots you took away your roll back capabilities, so you couldn't make use of Garuda's prime asset. Perhaps another distro designed for more modest hardware would be a good move for you.

BTRFS needs more space than a comparable ext4 based install. That's just the nature of the beast. Garuda is really designed for higher spec hardware with ample storage space and ram. Sadly, if you have lower end hardware Garuda isn't really going to shine on your machine.

Better luck with your next distro.

4 Likes

I only removed one intermediate small snapshot, and I did it through the UI provided by timeshift.

Garuda itself decided to remove the other three snapshots.

Garuda installed a partial system that wouldn't boot, despite its checks that it had enough space. Clearly it didn't.

Garuda gave no indication that it wouldn't work in limited space, and indeed failed when it tried to, after a few months of use.

Timeshift gave conflicting information about its snapshots.

In my view those are all problems in the Garuda distribution. All seem fixable and preventable if taken into account.

That's my assessment. I've been using various Linux distros since 1993 Yggdrasil, and working in IT R&D for longer than that, but feel free to ignore my feedback.

Best wishes!

1 Like

Feedback is fine, and it is definitely not ignored. However, what you are reporting, is far from common. I would go so far as to say this is very clearly an edge case.

Which timeshift snapshot did you remove? because they are all sequential and dependent on another. Generally when I want to clean out snapshots I wipe all of them and then perform a btrfs balance. After the balancing is complete, I then create a new snapshot.

I appreciate you are an experienced Linux user, but both Arch and Garuda are birds of a different feather and learning to master them both takes a fair bit of time.

3 Likes

Not for nothing, but you didn't exactly give Garuda a fair shake setting it up on a system that doesn't have the proper resources to run it. That's like taking a Ferrari body and dropping in an engine from a Ford Pinto, then saying "Turns out Ferrari isn't that great, I had problems with it."

If you are not specifically interested in running Garuda on that small partition, I would maybe pick a more basic distro and run a nice small DE on it with not too many extra features. Maybe Manjaro/XFCE, Fedora/Mate, or Linux Mint is nice.

5 Likes

I think @lukejkendall it is quiet useful with his knowledge that he has tested how little you can run garuda on?
I am glad he has worked out that with the warning on the website the minimum requirements have be tested ?
But the question i think i am more worried about is?
WHY?
I have a laptop that run linux mint well!! why would i put garuda on it? It would run like a bag of cr#p!
So the point i am making is?
I fit the distro to the hardware :smiley:

3 Likes

It's just that ol' fallacy that's been running 'round the 'net forever, "Linux FLIES on old machines."
Another "they say" that has no patient-zero. Somebody suggests they can resurrect that machine that barely met system specs. when it ran Windows by installing Linux, so beginners pick the flashiest distribution they can find. And, oh boy, is Garuda a flashy Ferrari! They don't suspect that power and flash comes at cost. :wink:

So they do as @tbg suggests and when they can't run it on that old Crapmobile, Linux gets another bad mark. Personally, I am not opposed to that, since we (Linux lovers) shouldn't have to shovel them dogfood their entire lives.
:rofl:

3 Likes

I chose it because I didn't notice any warning about running it on a small machine, but the main reason was that I was interested in trying it and with Garuda the wifi worked out of the box. Wifi didn't work in the laptop with a couple of other distros I tried.
Though this week I discovered Garuda didn't allow the mic to work.

I don't think you need to get upset or defensive that I didn't give it a fair try: personally I'd use my feedback to improve Garuda, to work around or warn of those problems.

Minimum requirements

  • 30 GB storage space
  • 4 GB RAM
  • Video card with OpenGL 3.3 or better
  • 64-bit system

I find this more than unfair. You are the admin.
If you bring your hard drive, no matter how big, to its limit, should you be told about it?
Apart from that, we experience it all the time, no matter where and how often we communicate something, it is hardly read.

4 Likes

I don't consider asking a question being upset or defensive. You were the one who ignored what I was asking when I was merely trying to ascertain why this may have happened.

As you're leaving Garuda anyways, and you really don't seem interested in finding out what happened to cause your issue, I guess we're about done here. There's not much point in continuing a purposeless discussion, so I'll close this out now.

Again, good luck with your next distro.

4 Likes

No, no, no, no. Nothing posted in any forum upsets me (very much) or puts me on the defensive (very much). But it appears I may have done so to you, and I do apologize. Sometimes words are best left unwritten.
:slight_smile:

My reply to @TilliDie was an observation that I have made over a long period of (in the Linux World) time. And I have seen newcomers stating so, in writing, in various Windows and even Linux forums (both ways). It also encompasses your remark concerning Arch Linux. You don't have the knowledge, yet, to do so successfully. But you don't know that. Yet. Again, an observation. Doing so requires a medium-to-advanced Linux knowledge that, observing your posts in this thread, you do not possess. Yet. It is possible to pick it up as you do so, but can you?

That yet is very important, because I don't wish to discourage your pursuit of that knowledge which encompasses a lot of reading, plus the experience values you pick up along the way. I also want to stress the value of that experience, because without it none of the literature or classwork you do will amount to anything.

Fail, then fail again.

What have you learned from this hands-on experience? Did you read the links several of the posters offered, and what did you learn from them?

Fail, then fail again. Keep reading, keep practicing--keep learning.

The successes you have ahead of you in Linux will soon far outnumber what did not work. Never be afraid of trying. I have witnessed successful10-year old Arch Linux beginners, and they picked it up almost immediately. They were sometimes very smart, but they were also very diligent. Which of those two values, intelligence or diligence, do you think helped them the most?

I so envy you. You are at the start, relatively speaking, of an amazing voyage of discovery. Anything I can do to encourage you, you have only to ask.

my best regards

5 Likes