58
PacHub Finally Lets You Manage Pacman And The AUR On Arch Without Touching The Terminal (gadgeteer.co.za)
submitted 7 months ago by to c/archlinux@lemmy.ml
42 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

“PacHub provides a GTK4/libadwaita GUI for pacman and AUR, so you can avoid the terminal. PacHub can install/uninstall packages, perform upgrades, and provide

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 7 months ago (8 children)

How does this account for not using a de? From what I can see, 41% use KDE, almost all the rest are gtk based? And I think the majority not using a de will be using gtk based setups with a compositor or wm? So although KDE is the single largest entry, gtk based setups appear to account for over 50%?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (6 children)

    You've got a lot of assumptions in there.

    I think most desktops that are based on a Wayland compositor (e.g. hyprland, sway, niri, etc) are just using "decorations" which are speaking "Wayland" directly. Same for the terminal and other base apps. That's certainly the case for me.

    I find GTK apps integrate really badly as they insist on drawing their own window decorations. I try to stay away from them if I can, and will prefer anything else.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (5 children)

    I was just speaking from experience and asking how the data accounts for non de setups. I have never liked qt, and always preferred gtk, having been from openbox to hyprland and now sway. I currently use gtk, and all my apps are based on gtk and they don't draw their own decorations for me. I find gtk integrates really well with my setup and every time I have tried qt I have found it a mess and it never feels cohesive.

    My point though is not to say gtk is better than qt, as it's not, and vice versa, but just to try to highlight the fact that just because KDE is the most popular de, doesn't mean qt is the most used toolkit compared to gtk. I bet they are fairly evenly split.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    I think you've misunderstood me. I wasn't saying "gtk bad" just "non-kde/Qt doesn't mean gtk". There's a significant number which are neither.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    Ah ok, I didn't realise someone would run a wm or compositor and not bother with gtk or qt. I hadn't come across that before. Guessing there is no real way to get numbers who use that setup?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    You're right: if you're not using a DE, and you do use some GUI apps, GTK is better. Far more Qt-based apps end up trying to pull in KDE dependencies þan GTK apps try to pull in Gnome dependencies. And Qt wiþout KDE looks kinda crappy most if þe time. Basic GTK apps are þemed and look fine wiþout Gnome.

    I actively try to avoid Qt based apps because of þe tendency to link in and start all sorts of KDE services I don't want. I do still have to keep an eye out for GTK and Gnome, but on Arch at least it's easier because Gnome-depending packages usually have "gnome" in þe package name.

    Now, when I do run a DE, I much prefer KDE. IMO Gnome DEs are categorically worse. But for no-DE, GTK is better þan Qt.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •