Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe] (Read 14247 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe]

Reply #30 –
Quote from: icstars – on

i depend on a graphical package manager to ...

* ease installs
* quickly find the web address of the repo
* get a description of the software
* compare a package to other packages
* check the build date
* list dependencies
* list included files
* ability to query multiple repos


Just a question, how is that more effective or faster than

Code: [Select]
pacman -Si <the_package>
?

you might give it a try.  :P

Re: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe]

Reply #31 –
well, one would have to know the name of the package and the repo it's in

and what if one just wanted to browse packages just to see what's available / what's new

or see a screencap
or know whether it's a GUI or terminal program
or know whether it's already installed
or ...

i suspect those that don't use graphical package managers are already comfortable in the terminal and already know exactly what they want, and that's fine, but those new to Linux OSs are unlikely to know the package names much less what repo to look in

pretty sure essentially no one uses the terminal to browse the www any more and browsing packages isn't all that dissimilar - there is more information available in the repos than what can be displayed in a terminal, so far as i know, plus it's organized and displayed in a far more pleasing way in a GUI

i think in the end the question isn't why, it's why not (include a GUI pkg manger)?  or at least something like Discover (KDE) where one can read reviews and get information like screen caps, etc.

Re: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe]

Reply #32 –
Quote from: icstars – on
i suspect those that don't use graphical package managers are already comfortable in the terminal and already know exactly what they want, and that's fine, but those new to Linux OSs are unlikely to know the package names much less what repo to look in
Code: [Select]
pacman -Ss browser | less
pacman -Ss audio | less
pacman -Ss player | less
pacman -Ss solitaire | less
No need to know package names.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Pacman

Re: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe]

Reply #33 –
i know that, but that doesn't address all the points in my argument for a GUI pkg manager or cater to those who don't want to have to remember terminal commands - and again, one cannot get all of the available info with pacman as you can with Pamac and Discover for example

if Artix is wanting to target people who are new, or fairly new to Linux OSs, not having a graphical package manager is going to be a turn-off for many and the fact that it's a turn of for me and others who have commented in this thread (and elsewhere) is evidence of that - it's simple; not everyone wants to use the terminal to display limited information that can be displayed in a far more organized and intuitive way with a GUI

you guys are the devs so it's obviously your choice, but it's a logical fact that some/many people are going to want/expect to be able to browse and install packages in a way that makes sense to them

Re: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe]

Reply #34 –
If you must, you can use kde's discover. It's in the official repos, it's officially supported by arch and artix, but doesn't have AUR support (wouldn't be official if it did).

Re: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe]

Reply #35 –
Quote from: icstars – on

if Artix is wanting to target people who are new, or fairly new to Linux OSs,


I thought it was clear to artix users that we don't target these. Maybe it wasn't communicated enough, but from the entire concept of artix, it should be clear it requires some experience with eg archlinux.
For GUI stuff, there is manjaro and other distros that do target these users.

Quote from: icstars – on
and again, one cannot get all of the available info with pacman as you can with Pamac and Discover for example

I would question this claim, under the hood, these gui tools call pacman or alpm api.
It is more likely, you lack the commands to achieve what the gui does for you under the hood.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Pacman

Re: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe]

Reply #36 –
I really don't understand all this fuss, we still provide the GUI package managers, just not in the official repos, but still a lot more trustworthy than a random 3rd party repo listed in the Arch wiki...

Re: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe]

Reply #37 –
I've followed the entire conversation, and I have some doubt about the mission of Artix.

Stated that generally speaking, a distribution should have the goal to spred his use, not easying things for newbies is a clear "stay away" sign.

This consideration will make me think about future of Artix.

Artix Users, (for now I'm thinking I'm yet an Artix User)  are searching for a "reliable" alternative to systemd Arch Linux, but having a "decent" user base will be a thing that is not "a bad thing", as more users usually means more people that "spread the voice". and make a distribution more "widely used".

Not using the GUI is not a problem, provided that there are a "decent" documentation, and this is only partially true with Artix.

As the differences between Arch and Artix are becoming bigger, shen I search for documentatio to solve a problem, like some fonts or other things i will find many references to systemd as it is invading "other linuxes" and Arch is among them.

What are the efforts to have a better documentation for Artix?

Many things could be simply made available to beginners, like some "pacman hints" or a sorto fo beginner guide, maybe covering some "topics" like fonts and other things, maybe some widespread problems, like "browsers settings" and so on that are becoming very subtle to manage, (I'm strugglig to have a decent visualization with FireFox, probabluy due to some fonts problems).

Only some things to discuss on, probably my post is in the wrong place, and my thinkings are not very clearly explained, and almost surely wrongs, but....

Regards

Carlo D.

Re: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe]

Reply #38 –
Artix is Arch without systemd, that was the original name of the project. See the description of Arch Linux on Wikipedia:
"The project attempts to have minimal distribution-specific changes, and therefore minimal breakage with updates, and be pragmatic over ideological design choices and focus on customizability rather than user-friendliness."
"This has earned it a reputation as a distribution for "advanced users" who are willing to use the command line."
"Arch Linux does not schedule releases for specific dates but uses a "rolling release" system where new packages are provided throughout the day. Its package management allows users to easily keep systems updated. Occasionally, manual interventions are required for certain updates, with instructions posted on the news section of the Arch Linux website."

If someone can't install pamac from an alternate repo they will soon come up against some update issue they cannot fix either, the system will cease to function, therefore there is no point in using Artix in the first place, it is unsuitable for them in general. Sure new users will get some help but ultimately they need the enthusiasm and willingness to learn to carry on and run with the ball of their own accord. And whether it's 100 users paying nothing to use Artix or 100,000,000 paying nothing that still adds up to nothing.  ;D

Re: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe]

Reply #39 –
Users who are new to Arch or new to Linux in general are recommended to use some "more new user friendly" distros, for example Linux Mint. Blindly jumping on Artix/Arch wagon will only frustrate everyone, including the user himself/herself.

How did Artix attract so many first-time Arch/Linux users remains a myth to me.

Re: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe]

Reply #40 –
Quote from: calvinh – on
How did Artix attract so many first-time Arch/Linux users remains a myth to me.

- Artix provides graphical installer with many premade bootable images with different desktops.
- Artix just works.

Re: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe]

Reply #41 –
artix can make their own gui package manager like octopi and call it artpac, they don't need octopi that much, its easy to make octopi from aur  with easy commands terminology i am used to anyway with making custom kernels and enlightenment environment

Re: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe]

Reply #42 –
Quote from: ivan_XI – on
artix can make their own gui package manager like octopi and call it artpac

Most of the Artix developers (hope all) can use pacman in terminal.

You are free to install anything you want be it nvidiía proprietary drivers, systemd, pamac, octopi, ubuntu, electron, nodejs... I have no idea how is Artix blocking you.

If you want to make another GUI wrapper for pacman you are free to do so, Artix has nothing to do with it.

These are my thoughts on the subject.

Re: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe]

Reply #43 –
People are overdramatizing the clarifications on AUR, pamac and octopi.

The gist is (again) that Artix doesn't officially support them, which means that users can't expect us to fix problems related to AUR packages and those two tools: pamac and octopi.

Far from it that we forbid them to install any of the above, but if they do, they are on their own if there are any problems.

We can help with official Artix packages or work on fixing bugs in the official Artix packages.

I am using AUR packages myself, but I know how to be careful with them and fix problems which might arise.

Re: Octopi and Pamac moved to [universe]

Reply #44 –
blocking who ?? i am free to speak on my mind  since artix team leader don't mind, i am curious about creating my owned gui package manager for my work since artix and arch packages already usable with pacman commands...not sure i have to make separate one for every init version..mine is S6...not sure they need to continue Suite66 still when S6 manage on their owned well than last version since both are the same..just s66 take tad longer to boot than S6..memory wise..i see no difference when using plasma...problem is plasma had many bugs since releasing version 5.19...now 5.23 gets better with nvidia users but still problem with overclockers and fan control still base on x11, not sure nvidia start making xwayland apps now or pure wayland...another thing about wayland...why developers thought xorg stop development when developers just taking a break, to me its lack of communication by wayland folks and linux community member...not us , cause we have the best forum that they keep everyone up to date whats happening in the community...but folks over sysd and wayland...they took the cake when xorg announce big update with next major version...so whats the point making wayland now?? anyway only thing the linux community did right is inviting sel4 community that was only wise decision they ever made for past 30 years for linux kernel developers on their foundation...now thats what i am talking about...imagine they gonna shared sel4 source code for linux foundation it will be amazing future kernel update with new security and improved managing hardware layer when loading the driver in secured way as possible under sel4+linux kernel without losing performance, this got me interested now with hybrid kernel aspect now, since linux kernel is very modifiable to custom variation...making smaller while sel4 be hypervisor for the kernel activity making sure no one else but only the user privileged have access to it