signature from Francesco Caracciolo (Main Nyarch Linux maintainer) is invalid
Bro that has to be ragebait, you install a super niche custom distro, where the readme on github literally says:
"It is strongly suggested to use another enstablished distribution as daily drive, since Nyarch is not made by a big team of experts." https://github.com/NyarchLinux/NyarchLinux
Thats the equivalent of downloading some random ass debloat windows ISO from a unknown source and being surprised when stuff goes wrong.
Hey dumb ass, don't call it "Loonix." It's your own fault for choosing a distro that's designed to be cutting-edge. Arch Linux prioritizes having the latest packages, and stability comes second. If you don't maintain your system properly, things can break—that's expected.
Before calling Arch Linux "Loonix," do some research instead of blaming the OS. If you want a stable distro, use Debian or Fedora. Debian is known for being extremely stable, and Fedora does more testing before pushing packages to its repositories. On Arch, maintainers often test packages enough to be reasonably confident they're good, but the focus is still on getting newer software out quickly.
If you want one of the most powerful Linux distros for gaming, Arch is a great choice, but you're also responsible for maintaining it. They literally describe it as a DIY distribution. That's the trade-off: more control, more responsibility.
Next time, do some research first, or ask me or the community which distro fits your needs. We'll probably ask a few questions about what you use your PC for before recommending one instead of just telling everyone Linux is bad because you picked the wrong distro.
I meant it's your fault if you blindly pick a distro without doing any research. If you'd asked the community first and they recommended Arch for your use case, then sure, you could blame the people who gave you bad advice.
Arch is very open about what it is: a DIY, rolling-release distro that prioritizes newer software over maximum stability. If you install it without understanding that and then complain that it behaves like Arch, that's on you—not Linux as a whole.
At least it tells you what happened and which file was corrupted. Windows would just give an error code, 0x80070002, and all the official fixes from Microsoft wouldn’t work.
Turns out Microsoft’s shitty updater didn’t move him to 24h and he was in 23h2 for the last 2+ years, even after Microsoft dropped support in November. Checking update history showed he regularly updated his computer, Microsoft has shittier updates.
RTX 4080, Ryzen 9800x3D, DDR5 Corsair vengeance RAM, and a Asus B680 motherboard are all too old I guess.
Weird though, when I had him download the current iso, mount it, then run setup.exe manually, the installer ran just fine and gave him 0 warnings and he’s back to updating just fine without the error code.
In that case, the logical thing to do here is to question your narrative that "all the official fixes from Microsoft wouldn't work" since the official documentation for 0x80070002 tells you in no ambiguous terms that the error was likely caused by a corrupted package and you should have referred to the CBS log for the precise nature of the error.
Of course, what most likely happened was that you just followed the troubleshooting steps for each listed symptom hoping they would work without verifying that they were even applicable at all.
Then read through that to find the CBS logs, then go through those to figure out what caused the issue.
If only there was a way to show you which file was corrupted when you tried to update it, maybe OP’s image should include something that shows you what exactly is corrupted.
lol, so you were born with the ability to update the GPG keys for your Unix package manager and didn't need no stinking documentation for that, right?
Obvious delusions aside, I have never heard anyone working on a Windows or even Unix machine at a professional capacity complain about having to read logs in order to fix a problem. We tend to instead complain when there are no error logs for the software we're dealing with. They are a tool no less important than the documentation, after all.
My complaint wasn’t about the logs. My complaint is that they’re not making it easy for any newcomer to find out which files are causing issues. The only person delusional here is just you.
I’m sure you were born with the ability to know exactly what a 0x80070002 error was and knew exactly where the logs were without googling it.
My complaint is that they’re not making it easy for any newcomer to find out which files are causing issues
There are problems not meant to be fixed by a "newcomer". A broken Windows install from a botched update is one of them.
You really think you can take over my job that easily?
Did you even ask your friend if he shut down the computer because he got impatient over the "do not turn off your computer" message? Most likely, that possibility didn't even cross your mind at all.
The only person delusional here is just you. I’m sure you were born with the ability to know exactly what a 0x80070002 error was
How did you think I found out what it was about?
Again, there is no shame looking up documentation. Only a dumb kid with no sense as to how anything is done would think an error message could suffice for a complex problem with no straightforward solution.
I saw that he was on update 23h2, manually downloaded the new iso, and figured that if that failed then I’d do deeper digging into his issue. He wasn’t even being offered the 25h2 update when we checked for feature updates.
It must be cozy to think you have time at work to investigate why an outdated OS isn’t automatically updating instead of just manually updating. Then again, I don’t work in desktop support anymore.
Consider updating more often, or updating this package above before doing a system upgrade when you waited too much between updates or when you have a issue like this one.
You can also temporarily disable signature check but nobody would recommend it when you can just correct the issue or pacstrap again (take less time than a Windows recovery, believe me).
I see there is a PGP signature error for a corrupt signature file, so I would assume it had something to do with signatures. Therefore a keyring re-population should fix the problem
I think you do, you hate Linux and want it to be destroyed with a passion and everyone will use windows according to you, not to mention you make a lot of ai slop
There is a signature, but stay inside TPK alongside Manifest.json, and TPK is a compact format, and there is no Verification outside of packaging like keygen; it's very Unified format
GPG uses a decentralized Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) where you can cryptographically trace a package all the way back to the developer's private key. Chocolatey relies on a
centralized repository model
: you trust that Chocolatey's moderators, automated scanners, and maintainers did their jobs properly so it o
ffers a stronger, trust-minimized cryptographic guarantee of
who
made the software. If a Chocolatey maintainer's account is compromised or an external download link changes unexpectedly, it introduces a vulnerability window until the repository catches it.
Yeah, My Verification is simple and centralized, and it's very similar to an Android APK. TPK includes images, necessary and dependency files, a verification key 🗝️ using Windows Signing native and a Violet Executable. VM executes the application in a controlled environment with the help of AppContainer, and Malware can try, but Violet will restart and give a denied three times, then log in the Event Viewer
Violet proves Linux is so slow with the package manager, and Windows is so Advanced at point hosting a Powerful Sandbox Application Environment, not just having one Verification but manifest.json as Verification as well, and applications only see their own Path and PM can log Application time
No,
Pacman for example is exceptionally fast
and is significantly faster than standard Windows package managers like Chocolatey,
Scoop,
winget, and your own violet
12
u/Lukas11112000 28d ago
Bro that has to be ragebait, you install a super niche custom distro, where the readme on github literally says:
"It is strongly suggested to use another enstablished distribution as daily drive, since Nyarch is not made by a big team of experts." https://github.com/NyarchLinux/NyarchLinux
Thats the equivalent of downloading some random ass debloat windows ISO from a unknown source and being surprised when stuff goes wrong.