I don’t know if some package is marked as “unrequired” by Pamac itself or Pamac just uses some internal “list” to determine if dependence is in use or not, so I don’t know what to blame: Pamac or Manjaro. Anyways, here’s a problem:
Install Manjaro KDE Minimal;
Enable “Remove unrequired dependencies” option in Pamac right after installation;
Remove Timeshift and timeshift-autosnap (which come pre-installed)
Restart… and system will never boot, it enters endless boot mode.
If “Remove unrequired dependencies” option is not checked and Timeshift is removed, everything works fine. Performed 4 fresh installations over weekend and result is always the same.
Alright, but shouldn’t it see that some package (which is going to be removed) is actually used by other programs. If it’s “normal”, what’s the point of having such a feature then, which will break system in 99% of cases then?
My advice is not to tic that box and instead on the installed tab in pamac there you will find an orphans section, this will show all non required packages. You should review this list an untick any you don’t want to remove. Any you keep can be removed from the list by setting them as “explicitly installed” under details of the particular file.
Have you checked if timeshift and timeshift-autosnap wouldn’t be dependencies of other (meta-)packages? Trying to remove the former may then also remove the latter, plus all the packages in the latter dependency tree…
It might depend on the exact ISO and how the profiles are written. @guinux tested the full ISO of KDE it seems based on a discussion I had with him:
Guillaume Benoit, [13.03.23 23:48]
Just tried with a fresh install from manjaro-kde-22.0.4-230222-linux61.iso in a VM and removing timeshift and timeshift-autosnap-manjaro doesn’t break anything even when “Removing unrequired deps” is enabled
Guillaume Benoit, [13.03.23 23:49]
Anyway if it occurs it’s just an error in the image. If all essential packages are marked as “explicitly installed”, the system can’t be broken by using this option.
Philip M, [13.03.23 23:51]
well it depends if that is the case as the list of packages to been installed are now more and more simplified and not so large to explicitly install them anymore
Philip M, [13.03.23 23:51]
we simply have to see on how to make it not so strict and avoid those situations and not expect that the base is installed explicitly
Guillaume Benoit, [13.03.23 23:59]
Yes just list essential packages to have a bootable system
Guillaume Benoit, [14.03.23 00:00]
If needed, it could also be integrated in pamac with a double check for removing those packages
Philip M, [14.03.23 00:01]
I think the check for really needed deps is the better and more solid idea instead of relying on some fancy list or profiles
Guillaume Benoit, [14.03.23 00:02]
yes and it also works with pacman
Philip M, [14.03.23 00:03]
how long would you need to add that feature?
Guillaume Benoit, [14.03.23 00:10]
Not so long, the hardest would be to define the list of packages to check
How the hell does that make any sense? How is user suppose to know some deep system stuff whether it’s needed by something else? Something considered “unneeded” should only be when NOTHING requires it. If anyone knows that it should be the system, not the user.
If this is really per app basis, then this setting shouldn’t exist because it’s destined for failure by default.