Wait untill pacman rust rewrite 
Yes, I agree. I think that’s one of the best things about Linux and the open source world. People like to try new ideas, build things their own way, share their work, and help each other improve. I think the open source community is one of the best parts of Linux.
Personally, I live alone, and I have a lot of freedom to spend my time learning, writing, developing software, and contributing to open source. Money is not my main motivation. I really like building things and learning from the process.
So I’m happy to start NeoArch, even if it’s not useful for everyone. Thanks to everyone for the feedback.
Haha, yeah 
Maybe by the time that happens, NeoArch will have another package management layer to deal with too!
From this shot here are my concerns:
You have the sources listed out with a radio button. While this can be useful this should be a reserved feature for “Advanced Users”. I think the AUR should be off by default and that you should have a disclaimer stating what the AUR is and that the user accepts the responsibility of such.
For Updating there should be no check marks by a package partial upgrades are NEVER recommended on Arch.
BTW my free opinion.
User want to use programs to do stuff. Not to manage system internals.
Linuxes overall luck “app shop” like experience.
This what actually pamac provided to me when I used it.
Reality that users constanly need to deal with something like: cannot update because of lib32-very-important-leftpaf dependency - is pretty sad.
Thanks, these are really good points. I agree that the AUR needs more explanation, especially for newer Arch users. Having it disabled by default and showing a clear warning about what the AUR is and the responsibility involved is something I’ll consider.
And yes, I agree about partial upgrades. Arch should be updated as a whole, not package by package. I’ll review the update UI and make sure it doesn’t encourage or make partial upgrades too easy.
I really appreciate this kind of specific feedback. It’s much more useful for me when improving NeoArch.
how about NOT AT ALL. not hard but impossible.
Yeah, I agree with you. Most users just want to install and use their programs without having to constantly think about package dependencies and system internals.
That’s actually one of the reasons I started NeoArch. I like Arch and the control it gives you, but I also think there should be a better “app shop” experience for people who want it.
And yeah, dependency issues like lib32-very-important-leftpaf are definitely not a great user experience.
.I agree that AUR should have a clear warning and probably be disabled by default.
And yes, partial upgrades should not be possible at all in NeoArch. The update process should always update the system as a whole.
I’m adding these things above the discussion for future development, right?
Application descriptions
- Improve package/application descriptions.
- Make descriptions easier for normal users to understand.
- Clearly distinguish applications from libraries/dependencies.
- Consider labels such as
Application,Library, orDependency.
- AUR
- Keep AUR disabled by default for new users.
- Add a clear warning explaining what the AUR is.
- Explain that AUR packages are user-maintained and have additional risks.
- Require the user to explicitly enable AUR.
- Consider making AUR options an Advanced User feature.
- System Updates
- Do not allow partial system upgrades.
- Remove package-selection checkboxes from the system update process.
- Always perform a full system upgrade.
- Users should not be able to select individual packages to update.
- Source Selection
- Review the radio-button source selection UI.
- Consider putting advanced source controls behind an Advanced Users option.
- Make it clear that different sources have different responsibilities and risks.
- Chaotic AUR
- No separate integration is necessary.
- Since NeoArch uses pacman, repositories configured in
pacman.confare already detected. - Consider mentioning Chaotic AUR support through pacman in the documentation so users know it works.
- General UX
- Make the application safer for beginners without taking control away from experienced users.
- Avoid UI elements that could encourage unsafe Arch practices.
- Add more explanations where an action has important Arch-specific consequences.
Here is another thing of critical importance.
Never use --noconfirm when doing updates. I can’t tell you how many times I have seen people break their systems over the years doing this on Arch-based distros.
Absolutely, agreed. I’ll make sure NeoArch never uses --noconfirm for system updates. Users should be able to review and confirm important changes before proceeding.
Thanks for pointing this out.
Should have a way for the user to read and agree to a PKGBUILD before installing/upgrading from AUR
I liked pacmanXG has also some maintainance stuf.
Personally I like pacseek.
Being able to review the PKGBUILD before installing or upgrading an AUR package would be a useful safety feature. I’m trying to make NeoArch easier to use without hiding what’s actually happening underneath, so I’ll look into adding this.
I also understand the point about pacseek and other existing tools. I’m not trying to say NeoArch is the only solution — I’m just trying to build a GUI that makes package management and maintenance easier for people who prefer that workflow.
Considering the vulnerable nature of the AUR, I think your use of the word “useful” would be better replaced with “critical”. Any tool that helps AUR package installation must incorporate security checks BEFORE installation. Even the YAY developers added basic security checks a few months ago. https://github.com/Jguer/yay/pull/2855
If you need inspiration, look at how popular the archcanary security project has become. Archcanary — a layered security scanner for Arch-based Linux
as said not useful a required feature. I am still very sus on this project and others like it and I hope you prove my paranoia wrong. But something is off here I just don’t know what.
I understand the concern. I agree that for anything handling AUR packages, security shouldn’t be treated as just an optional feature. I’ll look at the security checks used by yay and projects like ArchCanary and see what can realistically be implemented in NeoArch.
NeoArch is open source, so I hope I can earn that trust through the code, transparency, and continued development rather than just asking people to trust it. Thanks for being honest about your concerns. Thanks everyone for the security feedback. I started working on this today.
I’ve added a dedicated Security section in NeoArch with information about AUR risks, partial upgrades, package sources, and how NeoArch handles these things. I’ve also added AUR review options such as View PKGBUILD, View Changes, and Download Snapshot before installation/upgrades.
I’m also working on the update review and partial-update warnings, so NeoArch doesn’t silently perform these operations.
I agree that AUR security should be treated as an important part of the project, not just an optional feature. I’m taking the feedback seriously and will keep improving this area.
