Pamac CLI

pamac

#81

You got me. :laughing: As one of the clueless masses I had totally missed this evil plot. I thought you were just providing me with useful options. So completely fooled was I that I was on the verge of abandoning my coterie of AUR helpers. :open_mouth:

A special note for our genius redeemer

have a link:


#82

Originally, I just thought because you had all the code available you decided to add CLI commands for some common functions and increase functionality. But now the truth is out…

Adding CLI options to pamac can really only lead to one thing.
.
.
.
.
Let me know when the work to re-base Manjaro off of Ubuntu instead of Arch is complete.


#83

Don’t even joke about that… :shudder:…


#84

Ha Ha, I called this one a few days back on another thread before they let the cat out of the bag. How did I know, because it only makes sense that the developers of the distro want to grow the distro.

I have no problem with the developers wanting to make the transition from the buntu world to Manjaro a little less painful for those users. Why do you think Manjaro is so popular? A big part is the great tools like MSM that makes life much easier for the average user. This is no different. I have no problem with this as long as pacman is still retained for the users that prefer pacman.

This is really changing nothing for the users that prefer the Arch commands. Who cares if the refugees from buntuland want to use their precious apt-get command. As long as the same functionality is retained for pacman users, then whats the difference.

It is only natural for the leaders of the project to want to grow their distro. Who can blame them. There is strength in numbers. More users makes the distro far more secure in the long term. The larger the Arch based universe gets the better it is for everyone using that platform.

It’s kind of nice to be on board the little engine that could. Manjaro has shot up from the bottom rungs of the rankings to number 1. That couldn’t happen without the distribution being appealing to a larger segment of the Linux world.


#85

The implications of easier porting to PamacQT is a win. More intuitive syntax for newbies is a win. If pacman disappears I will still consider it a loss. As it stands pacman still has functionality that this tool would not provide. As it has the ability to work as an AUR helper it is a bit like that … at one time we had pacman and an aur helper installed. Now we will have pacman and pamac. All users happy. Continuity will also makes helpers happy when everyone has the same set of tools.


#86

Considering the recent kick-out given to PacUI, I suspect the same could easily happen to pamac as well. Would you think?


#87

Whether or not Arch allows it to be hosted in the AUR really has no effect on whether manjaro can use/distribute it.


#88

pacman will be always part of Manjaro, however, with having pamac-cli it will be possible not to be installed by default. This might be still up for discussion. First we have to prepare the PKGBUILD for that move, if we want to do so.

But: This thread is more in regard of pamac-cli and possible issues with it’s first release.


#89

I think you should continue to include some alternative to pamac for now. Given that pamac has a relatively small userbase it is not unthinkable to believe that a regression in pamac could get through testing and into stable. It would suck to create a situation where the system has a broken package manager.


#90

@mandog, this is a development topic, not a discussion topic.


#91

Then Manjaro is on the beginning of a slippery slope, telling users what they should want, and ignoring what they actually do.

:frowning:

This adds little to no value, particularly given the other functional deficiencies with mhwd and Pamac GUI currently.

How about working with other distros on commonly used software rather than create more fragmentation, more duplication … and for what?


#92

I suppose it is for the development and propagation of the package system, why else?

Someone has some time and skills and moves the system forward, no big deal.

It really has nothing to do with Manjaro as far as I can see.


#93

I know this is a development thread - but the comments from @philm on the possibility of not installing pacman as default - kind of raises a red flag to me.

I like the pamac cli - but as I always use pacman for maintenance and installation from the official repo.

I use pamac for package search, dependency checking, package content, package source.

I would see it as serious step back if it is removed and made an optional install.

It is like cutting your roots - leaving Manjaro floating in the air.


#94

To be on the safe side, I even have it twice :wink: in settings, ??? :slight_smile:

grafik


#95

This wasnt what this thread was about…

But, seriously, DO NOT REMOVE PACMAN.


#97

I’ve got a usage question for a change (Pamac 6.4.0-6):

When I use pamac-cli without sudo, I get no output and nothing happens.
E.g.: $ pamac update --aur --force-refresh --enable-downgrade

When I use pamac-cli with sudo, I get the following error message when updating an AUR package:
==> ERROR: Running makepkg as root is not allowed as it can cause permanent,
catastrophic damage to your system.

What to do? Thanks in advance!


#98

good report - growing pains is probably the answer.


#99

This works for me on version 6.4.0-6. The first thing it does is ask me for authentication.

I wonder if it is environmental?


#100

Interesting, thanks. I also suspect that it is environmental, but with no output I have no idea where to look.


#101

Yes you can’t use pamac update --aur as root.

No output at all ? Does pamac exit or not ?
What does pamac checkupdates --aur give ?