There was a recent update to pamac-aur recently (currently at v10.2.0-1), and right away I noticed the way packages were displayed looked a little bit different. It just looked to me like they had adjusted the padding or something to make the packages displayed better in their scrolling format. I always use pamac in a windowed type mode, so I never noticed anything out of the ordinary, but the other day I took pamac full screen and discovered part of what the update was all about. When in windowed mode, it just displayed one long list of packages, but in full screen mode now inside of a single list, you get multiple rows and columns of packages listed, which I think is a great addition to pamac as it puts the screen real estate to much better use this way and allowing for less scrolling and more of a chance for your eyes to find the package you’re looking for. From my understanding before the recent update, in full screen mode, it would just be a single column of packages to view, so this new addition is a welcome change in my opinion.
Just thought that was something kind of neat that I noticed after the recent update. I know only those few users that use ‘pamac’ too might find this a little interesting, but still I wanted to share my discovery with you all in the hopes maybe I helped show someone something new today! Below are just a few quick screenshots of what I tried my best to articulate in regards to the latest update. Thanks for reading and hope you have a great Friday!
I don’t think that is true unless you are referring to the distant past, 5+ years ago before I was using pamac. What it used to which caused partial updates had to do with automated mirror sorting and checking for updates.
By default I believe it forces a system update when you install packages but you can disable that if you choose to. On the other hand, you can do with the same thing with any package manager if you choose to.
I always recommend just using ‘pamac’ for the search, screenshots, and dependencies list features. For installing/removing/updating, I ALWAYS recommend using pacman or yay in your favorite terminal.
On the flip side of the coin…
I am tempted however, to consider doing something of a trial period of say like 30 days where I exclusively use pamac to install/remove/update my system to determine it’s actual reliability, since a lot of users (myself included) tend to swear it off from a bit of past experiences and anecdotal evidence which I wonder how much validity there still is to all of it. But I also do enjoy the stability and convenience that I get from pacman and yay which are well tested and well maintained to my liking.
I havent been keeping up on it recently, I do have someone i converted to EOS that was using it for a while sorta recently but ran into similar issues to me and pamac kept either locking up and closing or showing no updates when pacman showed updates that was about 6-7months ago though
Possibly you and/or your friend you converted to EnOS could try those settings and see if you get similar results as before or if possible maybe it starts to work fine for you two. As always, if you do that course, Timeshift and backups are always your friend
I think pamac gets a bad reputation, since it’s had some shenanigans that it’s caused in the past. Many users haven’t forgotten some of the baggage so this is partly why users might hesitate to recommend pamac or flat out refuse it. The most recent issue being from just a few months ago where pamac essentially DDOS’d the AUR (Source if you’re curious). It was a bug that was fixed, but not without some backlash.
But before I start to rant down a rabbit hole, if you’re happy using pacman, then you’re all good to go; the terminal is where it’s at!
In addition to that, I think there is the ongoing issue that it is Manjaro’s package manager and as result targets Manjaro’s packages which aren’t always the same as the Arch packages. As a result, it is often broken for periods of time on other distros.
I know some people say it doesnt let you review pkgbuilds for AUR but i know thats not true. You can review them but just like any aur helper newbies might not realize they should do that so not pamacs fault.
Yes, that is always going to be a bit of a “thorn in your side” scenario unfortunately. I haven’t experienced any issues (yet) in my 2-3 months so far, but it wouldn’t surprise me if at least one issue crept in within a years usage. I still find pamac useful enough for my own limited use case with it, but I’ll still always default to the terminal since some crazy tech nuts around here seem to think being terminal-centric is the way to go ( this is a joke btw )