PacUI: Bash script providing advanced Pacman and Yay/Pikaur/Aurman/Pakku/Trizen/Pacaur functionality in a simple UI

yes limited , is just a copy of pacconf in pacutils package

with the latest commit, i have just added support for pakku.


i have added aurman support with the latest commit.

please report any problems you find.
notice that “aurman -Si <package_name>” does not work yet, which means there is no package information available!


aurman is now the AUR helper with the highest priority in pacui.
AUR helper priority in pacui is: Aurman/Trizen/Yay/Pikaur/Pakku/Yaourt/Pacaur

if you have multiple AUR helpers installed, you can manually choose your favorite by setting a variable within pacui as described here:


why not use an environment variable instead of propose to edit the file?
AUR_Helper=“yaourt” pacui
or export in .bashrc

there has been criticism from a guy called “Alad” in the arch wiki (“Add pacui to the table?” section) and the arch AUR repo (comments). there is also a forum topic about it.

this guy is mainly criticizing the use of partial updates within pacui.

i have thought about the problem for a while and i am in a dilemma and need your help.
but first, you need to under how partial updates are used in pacui:

  1. (parts of) pacui’s “fix pacman errors” option assume 2 things:

    • the user’s keyring is outdated or broken
    • the system has not been updated for a considerable amount of time

    If these assumptions are correct, all attempts to install packages fail, because the keys cannot be successfully verified.

  2. in order to fix this problem, all pacman key checks are (temporarily) disabled.

  3. next, essential packages like gnupg and archlinux-keyring manjaro-keyring are (re)installed using

    sudo pacman -Sy <package_name> --noconfirm

    this is a partial update, which is strongly discouraged by the arch wiki.

  4. pacman key checks are enabled (again)

  5. next, the keyring is initialized/refreshed using pacman-key.
    because pacman-key is not updated (whereas the gnupg package was updated in the partial update), pacman-key (and/or gnupg) might be unable to (properly) work.

  6. the entire system is updated properly/non-partially using

    sudo pacman -Syu

here comes my dilemma:

  • if i want to prevent any (potential) problems in step 5, i can do a full/non-partial update in step 3 using “sudo pacman -Syu <package_name> --noconfirm”

  • if assumption no. 2 in step 1 is correct and “sudo pacman -Syu <package_name> --noconfirm” is used in step 3, many packages on the user’s system are reinstalled without verifying any keys.

what do you think is more important for pacui’s “fix pacman errors” option (please give me some reasons for your decision below):

  • prevent (possible) failures caused by partial updates
  • verify keys for an update of (many) packages

0 voters

1 Like

i can add an (optional) environment variable, too.

edit: added in the latest commit.

1 Like

@excalibur1234 I am getting the following error when I choose the maintain option:

 checking systemctl ...
/usr/bin/pacui: line 290: ((: UNIT                         LOAD   ACTIVE SUB    DESCRIPTION                                  > 0 : syntax error in expression (error token is "LOAD   ACTIVE SUB    DESCRIPTION                                  > 0 ")

I am using version 1.10.3-1

thanks for the report.

edit: sorry, i was too fast here. you are not using pacui-git but the stable version?
hmm, that might be tricky…

what is your output of

systemctl --failed

mine is

~ > systemctl --failed                                                                                                                                       [130]
0 loaded units listed. Pass --all to see loaded but inactive units, too.
To show all installed unit files use 'systemctl list-unit-files'.

p.s.: i think i have fixed it even without example output from you. it should be more robust now. commit is available in pacui-git.

To be honest, I don’t know the best answer to this. That’s my educated guess on poll. Is pacui’s future goal to be an AUR helper?

1 Like


no, it is not. pacui is a wrapper for pacman and AUR helpers.

nevertheless, i want pacui achieve its goals as best as possible. this is the reason i have asked for other opinions.

I wanted to install aurman to try it out using pacui but it won’t install due to one or more pgp sigs can’t be verified.

1 Like

Figured it out. Will use pacui for a few days to try it out.

1 Like

Using pacui-git now and update works :slight_smile:

1 Like

aurman has just received an update, which makes it fully functional with pacui-git.

i have tested it briefly and everything seems to work well.


because of this topic, i have just added a new part to the “maintain system” option, which checks for packages, which were moved to the AUR:

feel free to test it and give some feedback.


i did a few updates to pacui-git today:

  • “install packages” should be a little slower during startup now, but its package info preview should be noticeable faster now. for fastest performance, “yay” is recommended. “aurman” and “pikaur” are much slower.
    i am proud of this achievement. unfortunately, i cannot speed it up further, because of fzf limits.

  • the “fix pacman errors” option now does less partial updates, but more updates without checking package keys. i have tried to minimize such updates, tough. also, this option only fixes keys when the keyring is clearly broken.

  • yaourt support has been removed. in light of the current malware in the AUR and its insecurity, i no longer want to support it.

  • the default preference of AUR helpers has been changed (but you can set your preferred AUR helper anyway)

please test the latest version and report bugs. if no major bugs are found, i will release a new version of “pacui” soon.


…should be done with all isos and users should be informed to replace yaourt.


If only yaourt is installed then pacui simply won’t work with AUR. The user will have to isntall a different AUR helper.