8 ms·

I guess the idea here is to bring the joy of running Arch and Gentoo to the unwashed masses?

saosebastiao 14y ago
If it weren't for pacman's weird user interface (not functionality, just the UI), I might have already switched to Arch. As Ubuntu gets worse (it seems like every day there is a new anouncement that sucks), pacman looks better and better.
- arthulia 14y ago
  What UI are you talking about? pacman is a relatively simple to use cli tool. -S to install something, -Ss to search for something -y to update the package list, and -Su to upgrade packages; that's basically four flags to memorize. Or do it all at once with -Syu.
  - politician 14y ago
    I can't tell if you're being sarcastic. I guess that means you've won.
  - deelowe 14y ago
    It's simple, but the switches are rather odd. I get the point of S, Y, U etc... and then the minor options of yu etc... but it's rather arbitrary in practice. Note: -S isn't "install," it's for syncing which does all manner of things including installs, but not removals (oddly enough). It's little things like this that bother me about pacman.
  - zanny 14y ago
    It is also valuable to know -R and c and s to remove a package and its dependencies and dependents.
- LukeShu 14y ago
  pacman is a little awkward, but I prefer it to apt/dpkg, which have sub-commands, each with their own flags, some of which are undocumented. pacman, on the other hand, has ALL options documented in one fairly short man page. The trick to understanding pacman is to understand how it maintains databases of packages, and what it means to "sync". There are several "databases" that pacman deals with: * "the database", (`/var/lib/pacman/local/`) The database of currently installed packages * "package databases", (`/var/lib/pacman/sync/${repo}.db`) There is one of these for each repository. It is a file that is fetched over plain http(s) from the server; it is not modified locally, only updated. The "operation" of pacman is set with a capital flag, one of "DQRSTU" (plus -V and -h for version and help). Of these, "DTU" are "low-level" (analogous to dpkg) and "QRS" are "high-level" (analogous to apt). To give a brief explanation of cover the "high-level" operations, and which databases they deal with: "Q" Queries "the database" of locally installed packages. "S" deals with "package databases", and Syncing "the database" with them; meaning it installs/updates packages that are in package databases, but not installed on the local system. "R" Removes packages "the database"; removing them from the local system. The biggest "gotcha" is that "S" deals with all operations with "package databases", not just syncing "the database" with them. Edit: formatting. I've over-done quotation marks to make it clear when precise wording matters.
- yogo 14y ago
  Generally I only have to use the following: pacman -Ss (for the occasional search) pacman -Syu [pkgname] (I almost always use yu to ensure that things are always in sync) pacman -Rsun pkgname pacman -Qi pkgname pacman -Sc (used every so often) I would say those cover 99% of my interaction with pacman. I'm not sure of any other interfaces to use it so it would be interesting to know more about how you use pacman.
  - LukeShu 14y ago
    There are several GUI wrappers around pacman (and several wrappers to unify it with AUR), but for the most part that's it. I'd add that I'd be careful about -n on -R (don't back up configuration files when removing a package); I'd let pacman back them, then catch them in my usual `sudo find /etc -name '.pac'`.
  - notatoad 14y ago
    I've got to say, as somebody who is very comfortable with the command line (my job is linux server admin) but has never used arch before, that sounds pretty damn obtuse.
- andrewflnr 14y ago
  I felt the same way, but once I actually learned it, it's pretty straightforward. Besides just installing packages, -Qs, -Ss, and -Si give me most of the information I need in a digestible way. I never did figure out how to do most of that with apt-get. After working out the kinks, I'm loving Arch on my laptop, 10-second startups and ~6 hours of battery, with basically nothing running that I didn't ask for. Working out the kinks was/is admittedly non-trivial. Read the directions. ;) Edit: OK, 18 seconds. Still pretty good.
  - saosebastiao 14y ago
    The idea of only running things that I decide to run is probably the most appealing thing to me about Arch/Gentoo. And I'm sure I'll figure out the user interface, but I still think it is weird. I'll probably think of maybe 5 more excuses to keep using Ubuntu before I toss in the towel and switch to Arch. Just out of curiosity, what are Arch desktop users using for servers, where the rolling-release format isn't as acceptable?
- gary4gar 14y ago
  <scarcasm>You know there is a nifty feature called bash aliases which is present in linux. so 'pacman -Syu' can simply be called 'upgrade'</scarcasm> But seriously, alias commands you use, no need to remember the oddities.
rogerbinns 14y ago
The reason I originally switched from Gentoo to Ubuntu several years ago is that Gentoo kept deferring from marking things stable. At one point it had been almost 10 months since a Gnome release and it still wasn't marked stable. This was during a time of great transitions like Network Manager - something that was desperately needed. You could of course go in and say it was okay to install the unstable versions of various packages but my list just kept getting longer and longer. Rolling distributions change the big milestones from everything to smaller pieces but they will still be a problem such as when new Gnome/GCC etc releases come out that interact with a lot of other packages. My main problem with Ubuntu/Canonical is that they seem to prefer going their own way instead of trying to collaborate. Unity could be done as a Gnome Shell extension. Replace upstart with systemd. Do something about the bugs.
- jebblue 14y ago
  I'm not sure rolling releases makes sense but either removing Unity or making it as configurable as Gnome 2 was would be a huge step back in the right direction.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- notatoad 14y ago
  Unity could be done as a gnome shell extension now (and it would probably be better if it were done that way) but when development started there was no gnome shell - compiz was the go-to solution if you wanted a compositing window manager, and unity is a compiz plugin. if anybody was doing things their own way instead of collaborating, it's the gnome folks. It just so happened that gnome's solution turned out better. Similar situation with upstart vs systemd - when they introduced upstart, systemd was either brand new or nonexistent (can't remember exactly) and for quite a while, it looked as though upstart would be the solution to replace the old init.
illicium 14y ago
Ah yes, the joy of having to religiously read release news to make sure the next `pacman -Syu` won't horrifically screw up your system. Having been an Arch user for several years, I understand the appeal of rolling-release, but if Canonical doesn't make it safe they'll ruin the "plug'n'play" appeal of Ubuntu.

If it weren't for pacman's weird user interface (not functionality, just the UI), I might have already switched to Arch. As Ubuntu gets worse (it seems like every day there is a new anouncement that sucks), pacman looks better and better.

arthulia 14y ago
What UI are you talking about? pacman is a relatively simple to use cli tool. -S to install something, -Ss to search for something -y to update the package list, and -Su to upgrade packages; that's basically four flags to memorize. Or do it all at once with -Syu.
- politician 14y ago
  I can't tell if you're being sarcastic. I guess that means you've won.
- deelowe 14y ago
  It's simple, but the switches are rather odd. I get the point of S, Y, U etc... and then the minor options of yu etc... but it's rather arbitrary in practice. Note: -S isn't "install," it's for syncing which does all manner of things including installs, but not removals (oddly enough). It's little things like this that bother me about pacman.
- zanny 14y ago
  It is also valuable to know -R and c and s to remove a package and its dependencies and dependents.
LukeShu 14y ago
pacman is a little awkward, but I prefer it to apt/dpkg, which have sub-commands, each with their own flags, some of which are undocumented. pacman, on the other hand, has ALL options documented in one fairly short man page. The trick to understanding pacman is to understand how it maintains databases of packages, and what it means to "sync". There are several "databases" that pacman deals with: * "the database", (`/var/lib/pacman/local/`) The database of currently installed packages * "package databases", (`/var/lib/pacman/sync/${repo}.db`) There is one of these for each repository. It is a file that is fetched over plain http(s) from the server; it is not modified locally, only updated. The "operation" of pacman is set with a capital flag, one of "DQRSTU" (plus -V and -h for version and help). Of these, "DTU" are "low-level" (analogous to dpkg) and "QRS" are "high-level" (analogous to apt). To give a brief explanation of cover the "high-level" operations, and which databases they deal with: "Q" Queries "the database" of locally installed packages. "S" deals with "package databases", and Syncing "the database" with them; meaning it installs/updates packages that are in package databases, but not installed on the local system. "R" Removes packages "the database"; removing them from the local system. The biggest "gotcha" is that "S" deals with all operations with "package databases", not just syncing "the database" with them. Edit: formatting. I've over-done quotation marks to make it clear when precise wording matters.
yogo 14y ago
Generally I only have to use the following: pacman -Ss (for the occasional search) pacman -Syu [pkgname] (I almost always use yu to ensure that things are always in sync) pacman -Rsun pkgname pacman -Qi pkgname pacman -Sc (used every so often) I would say those cover 99% of my interaction with pacman. I'm not sure of any other interfaces to use it so it would be interesting to know more about how you use pacman.
- LukeShu 14y ago
  There are several GUI wrappers around pacman (and several wrappers to unify it with AUR), but for the most part that's it. I'd add that I'd be careful about -n on -R (don't back up configuration files when removing a package); I'd let pacman back them, then catch them in my usual `sudo find /etc -name '.pac'`.
- notatoad 14y ago
  I've got to say, as somebody who is very comfortable with the command line (my job is linux server admin) but has never used arch before, that sounds pretty damn obtuse.
andrewflnr 14y ago
I felt the same way, but once I actually learned it, it's pretty straightforward. Besides just installing packages, -Qs, -Ss, and -Si give me most of the information I need in a digestible way. I never did figure out how to do most of that with apt-get. After working out the kinks, I'm loving Arch on my laptop, 10-second startups and ~6 hours of battery, with basically nothing running that I didn't ask for. Working out the kinks was/is admittedly non-trivial. Read the directions. ;) Edit: OK, 18 seconds. Still pretty good.
- saosebastiao 14y ago
  The idea of only running things that I decide to run is probably the most appealing thing to me about Arch/Gentoo. And I'm sure I'll figure out the user interface, but I still think it is weird. I'll probably think of maybe 5 more excuses to keep using Ubuntu before I toss in the towel and switch to Arch. Just out of curiosity, what are Arch desktop users using for servers, where the rolling-release format isn't as acceptable?
gary4gar 14y ago
<scarcasm>You know there is a nifty feature called bash aliases which is present in linux. so 'pacman -Syu' can simply be called 'upgrade'</scarcasm> But seriously, alias commands you use, no need to remember the oddities.

rogerbinns 14y ago

The reason I originally switched from Gentoo to Ubuntu several years ago is that Gentoo kept deferring from marking things stable. At one point it had been almost 10 months since a Gnome release and it still wasn't marked stable. This was during a time of great transitions like Network Manager - something that was desperately needed. You could of course go in and say it was okay to install the unstable versions of various packages but my list just kept getting longer and longer. Rolling distributions change the big milestones from everything to smaller pieces but they will still be a problem such as when new Gnome/GCC etc releases come out that interact with a lot of other packages. My main problem with Ubuntu/Canonical is that they seem to prefer going their own way instead of trying to collaborate. Unity could be done as a Gnome Shell extension. Replace upstart with systemd. Do something about the bugs.

jebblue 14y ago
I'm not sure rolling releases makes sense but either removing Unity or making it as configurable as Gnome 2 was would be a huge step back in the right direction.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
notatoad 14y ago
Unity could be done as a gnome shell extension now (and it would probably be better if it were done that way) but when development started there was no gnome shell - compiz was the go-to solution if you wanted a compositing window manager, and unity is a compiz plugin. if anybody was doing things their own way instead of collaborating, it's the gnome folks. It just so happened that gnome's solution turned out better. Similar situation with upstart vs systemd - when they introduced upstart, systemd was either brand new or nonexistent (can't remember exactly) and for quite a while, it looked as though upstart would be the solution to replace the old init.

illicium 14y ago

Ah yes, the joy of having to religiously read release news to make sure the next `pacman -Syu` won't horrifically screw up your system. Having been an Arch user for several years, I understand the appeal of rolling-release, but if Canonical doesn't make it safe they'll ruin the "plug'n'play" appeal of Ubuntu.