I upgraded to Fedora 40 workstation a couple of days ago. I never turn off or suspend my laptop (a Thinkbook 14s Yoga) and it was guranteed to be dead if i left it unplugged for a couple of hours before the update.

With Fedora 40 it’s been unplugged for almost 5 hours and still has 52% battey left (down from 59% when i unplugged the charger).

I noticed both TLP and auto-cpufreq have been disabled after the update so this looks like default power settings are being used.

I’m not sure if it means I’ll be getting consistently better battery life but i thought maybe it’s a good idea to share this first impression anyway.

Has anyone had a similar experience?

  • nossaquesapao@lemmy.eco.br
    1·
    8 months ago

    That’s interesting. I usually skip each other fedora version, and will probably go from 39 to 41, but if there are improvements to battery life, maybe I will try it now.

    • boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net
      32·
      8 months ago

      Why would you do that, there is absolutely no reason. Fedora only supports upgrading one version up. oops its 2

      Stay on the old stable if you like, but then switch to the latest? Why?

      • nossaquesapao@lemmy.eco.br
        7·
        8 months ago

        Fedora actually supports skipping every other version. They point it at the docs:

        . System upgrade is only officially supported and tested over 2 releases at most (e.g. from 38 to 40). If you need to upgrade over more releases, it is recommended to do it in several smaller steps (read more).

        As for why I do that, the six months release cycle is too fast for me. I struggle a lot with things and end up living in a slow paced manner. In this case, the process is supported and I receive security updates normally, so I don’t see a problem and it works fine for me. Besides, I have only one computer I use for everything, and I had problems with things not working properly after a distro upgrade in the past (it was with ubuntu, but I got a bit traumatized after that).

        • lemmyvore@feddit.nlEnglish
          1·
          8 months ago

          TBF with Ubuntu it’s only partly their fault. The other part is indirect due to the way apt works and the spread of third-party repos (launchpad etc.) that would throw you in dependency hell come upgrade time.

          Ubuntu (and Debian, and any distro using apt) are badly in need of some way to dissociate core packages from third-party better. For Ubuntu that way was snap.

          People may dislike the politics around snap or the technical implementation but the reason Ubuntu resorted to it is valid.