I like to use pamac - specifically pamac-aur-git - and I very much appreciate the work the developer does in maintaining this program.
I understand the problems he is having with the new pacman 6.0 and I understand why we do not yet have a compatible version of pamac-aur-git.
Obviously I, along with others who like this program, are going to have to be patient.
In the meantime, I have installed and am using bauh. It’s not a bad program and it certainly works well but it’s not as elegant (solely in my opinion) as pamac-aur-git nor (again in my opinion) is it as easy and/or as convenient to use in finding new programs.
Of course I am used to pamac-aur-git so naturally this influences my opinion. I suppose I can get used to bauh as well if I use it often enough. (I’m fairly old and you know what “old people” think of change! )
I do have a question to which I have not been able to find the answer: does anyone know what bauh means or stands for? Is it an abbreviation or a word in a language other than English?
I would disagree with these two quibbles. Ok, maybe bauh could use some more “information” readily available about each app instead of digging for it by right clicking, but I find it very easy to use and find stuff, across all platforms; Arch/Aur/Flatpack/Snap.
The one thing bauh does have going for it, and I have used it just as long as Pamac, well at least until the last year, is it has never stopped working.Unfortunately, this little snafu for Pamac is not the first halted rodeo leaving users high and dry. I think stability and consistency is an important thing to consider. Just my two cents.
Of all the graphical software managers, bauh is my favorite.
That being said, what bauh isn’t great at, is software discovery. For example, if you know you want an application to edit documents but you don’t know what is available, bauh isn’t that helpful in that scenario.
On the other hand, I don’t use graphical package managers so maybe my opinion isn’t all that important.
In all seriousness, it is all a matter a personal preference and prior experience. If you are used to installing apps from a store, the idea of searching a webpage and then having to type a package name into a different tool may not feel right.
I only very rarely installed programs from these programs (pamac-aur-git, bauh, etc.) and I haven’t used them for installation in a long time, I use them to discover new programs. Once I find a program, I install it with yay in the Terminal.
I find pamac-aur-git the easiest program for me to use in this regard. But it does seem to break a lot.
I’m going to use bauh for this purpose going forward so I can get used to it. Again, I won’t install programs from it; I’ll just use it to discover and/or investigate new ones. I think that, at this point, I’m just going to forget about pamac (and its variants). It’s a shame because I really liked that program.
I have to sat it surprises me the number of folks who have come to depend/ enjoy pamac and feel ‘real loss’ at its current state. TBH, I’m one of those. However consider the upside, this event does provide a wonderful incentive/opportunity to try new approaches to a common daily routine (many noted in this thread).
It’s a real loss. As I have proven in another thread I’m dumb as a nut, who is not even capable of reading pacman output the way it is supposed to be read.
I really do prefer GUI package management to terminal management. I got used to it using YaST for decades. To be honest I intend to stick to that handling. It’s much more convienent especially when searching for keywords in descpription, or searching for dependencies etc.
Since I switched to EndeavourOS I have nearly all available terminal solutions installed and tested (pacman, yay, trizen, paru, pikaur, pacaur). For daily use/updates I exclusively use yay. Nevertheless I prefer a graphical solution for searching purposes (pamac, octopi, bauh; my preferences in this order).