"Finally" what a revolutionary program that is not the same as bauh, octopi and pamac. I like options free software all at but fuck sensationalist headlines
post
If you are planning on running Arch "without touching the terminal", you're going to have a bad time
Not if you're running an Arch-based distro, like CachyOS. Between CachyOS's Hello app and Octopi, it just works.
Granted, I do use the terminal, but that's because I'm a tinkerer and I want to do unusual things, not just web + games + office suite. For most users, they never need to see the terminal, aside from hitting "q" and "y" when they install or update things a few times.
Ish. Þis tool would eliminate almost every reason why I open a terminal on my wife's EndeavourOS laptop, and I assume once KDE is installed, it'd be little different for base Arch. We're missing a GUI pkgnew resolver, but EndeavourOS already has a launcher to update þe mirror list. Most key issues are resolved by updating þe keyring package... what else do you need to touch þe terminal for if all you do is normie GUI user stuff like word processing, web browsing, games, and media consumption? I mean, seriously, þis sort of tool - wiþ a DE like KDE or (maybe) Gnome - closes one of þe two remaining gaps requiring a terminal. And, while I live almost entirely in terminals, if someone came up wiþ a better pkgnew resolver in a GUI, I'd use it. Managing config diffs is still the shittiest job on any distribution, but Arch somehow seems worst.
I mean pamac has existed for a while...
umm.. how is it different from KDE's Discover?
Lesss gooooo!!!!
Sadly not on AUR :<
Try octotpi
"AUR without touching the terminal"
Am I wrong to feel that if you don't want to touch the terminal, you probably shouldn't be messing with the AUR? The potential for disaster seems very real.
With most AUR helper there is basically no difference between "yay -Syu package" vs clicking in the GUI. Most ppl probably skip the pkgbuild and so on anyway.
As long as its communicated clewrly, its fine imho.
I'll go further and just say they shouldn't use Arch at all. The "stop being a gatekeeper, I shouldn't need the terminal" to "everything just suddenly broke itself after an update" pipeline is so real.
I straight up just think these tools that simplify the install process or package management shouldn't exist. The difficulty in Arch was never in the install processes. Anybody who can follow the instructions on a box of mac and cheese can eventually stumble through the process to install Arch and use pacman. The challenge was not digging your own grave post-install to the point that you need to wipe and start fresh, an experience basically every Arch user goes through at least once. The problem is that the further you abstract these tools and divest the user from hands-on experience, the less they understand about why it broke.
Basically, these tools don't make the hard parts easier, they make the easy parts easier in a way that leaves new users less equipped to understand the hard parts.
not qt
angry kde user noises
Some mf was on his computer one day and said “You know what would be fire? Phone UI”
We already have KDE Discover, which im pretty sure works for the AUR as well. It could definitely do with some more work to improve pacman support, but I actually like it.
Making an Arch-targeted tool in libadwaita is certainly a choice when the majority of arch users are using KDE, but okay, you do you fam.
Very neat tool otherwise.
Libadwaita is great; I hate it when more than two buttons fit on-screen at once
I'd be surprised if the majority of folks on arch aren't using tiling WMs.
Me using KDE applications within a tiling WM:

How do you know that?
From anyone that has the pkgstat package installed:
https://pkgstats.archlinux.de/fun/Desktop%20Environments/current
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%?
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.
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.
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.
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.
GTK does not mean libadwaita. That is a addition on top of GTK. Many of the GTK programs and environments don't use libadwaita. It is mostly only the GNOME stuff that does.
It's fine? It's not like libadwaita is great or anything but it's also not like it will completely blow up when running on KDE
If you're dying for a KDE version there's Octopi, though that GUI is more technical
I'm in camp "people should learn about their systems no matter what". we're in an era where people can't tell what's a file and what's executable , can't unzip things or edit a plain text file. sure there should be mechanisms to easy people into the learning but it should still happen, there shouldn't be this rampant incuriosity
I never thought I'd see this day. Wow.
So... I don't see anything about .pacnew there.
Or reinstalling grub after updates
Or folder permission changes
Or...
edit: you still technically have to touch the terminal to confirm yes or no with octopi, didn't realize this meant completely terminal free. But also this is such an xda-developers headline lol.
finally lets you manage pacman and the AUR on Arch without touching the terminal
excuse me? https://github.com/aarnt/octopi
ButtFood Finally Lets You Inject Food And Drinks Into Your Butt Without Opening The Mouth
all 17 comments