4 ms·
TFA describes trouble with the included GUI front-end, resorting to installing a different one after manually updating pacman in the terminal. User friendly, t
by skyyler 3y ago
TFA describes trouble with the included GUI front-end, resorting to installing a different one after manually updating pacman in the terminal.
User friendly, that ordeal is not.
- johnisgood 3y agoSo the issue is with the GUI, and not the package manager itself?
- skyyler 3y agoI do mean this in the nicest way possible: You could read the linked article and quickly find out for yourself :-)
- johnisgood 3y agoOK, but I was responding to: > It's user-friendly if you think having a package manager that's broken out of the box is user-friendly. The package manager here is pacman, and it implies that pacman is broken out of the box.
- royjacobs 3y agoIf the primary way the user is interacting with the package manager in this user-friendly distro is via the GUI then of course I mean the GUI when talking about the package manager.
- johnisgood 3y agoAlrighties, got chu. In that case I agree.
- skyyler 3y agoYou still haven't read the article, have you? :-(
- johnisgood 3y agoShush, I have! I am just nitpicking here. :P
- skyyler 3y agoDoes nitpicking often yield good information in your experience?
- johnisgood 3y agoSometimes. I already told you why I asked the question, it did not specify the GUI per se, only the package manager, and the GUI front-end to that package manager is NOT the package manager itself, which is exactly what has been said. It has already been answered though. But again, if someone mentions the package manager and not the GUI, why would I believe otherwise? I was simply asking for clarification. Does asking for clarification often yield good information in your experience?
- skyyler 3y agoSometimes, re-reading the source material can elucidate questions I have about comments :-) In this case, it's really obvious what everyone was talking about with the context of the article fresh in my mind.