Yaourt waterfox

yaourt waterfox

bash: >you don't have enough space for that

>has 280 Gigs free

wew i guess i am going to live with spyware browsers then.

Other urls found in this thread:

aur.archlinux.org/yourpackage
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>using a frontend to the AUR
>using yaourt as your frontend
shiggy diggy diggy DAWG!!!

use trizen

ubuntu nooblet here, what are you talking about?

>trizen
or just use makepkg like a real internet boi

arch user repository, it's arch's way for allowing community members to share software with other arch users. theres a tool included with arch that you can use to build packages from the AUR and install them on your machine called makepkg. Sometimes you can get weird issues with dependencies when you download stuff from the AUR. there are frontends that are supposed to help deal with issues like dependency chains etc, but they can be kinda tumultuous as they can mask the process of downloading and installing software dependencies. yaourt in particular is not very transparent with what dependencies it downloads and installs unless you tell it to do so. It can just be dangerous if you're installing a package that you're unsure about.


tldr;

just download source from the aur and cd into the directory and makepkg -i

don't use yaourt

you have to download it to an specific place o not fuck it up or you can just leave it in the downloads folder like in ubuntu?

What do you think about alpine

call me an idiot antergos user, but if the "arch way" is to use pacman and similar for the AUR, isn't doing manually just a bad way to do things?

They can be downloaded and stored basically anywhere.

General practice has the user create a folder to contain all AUR packages just to keep track of them, but it's not a requirement.

iirc manually installing aur packages places them under pacman's supervision once they're installed

nope, you can use git to clone the repo to where ever you would like in your system, i tend to keep everything i build from the AUR in one directory though.

git clone https:// link to code repo ~/path/to/local/directory

then cd to ~/path/to/local/directory

and then

makepkg -i

the -i just tells makepkg to check for and download dependencies. you might run into issues where makepkg can't find a dependency because it's another program in the AUR, in which case you have to download that and perform this process with that software before you can finish installing whatever you were attempting to install. This isn't very common however, and aur front ends can eliminate this issue, its just important to understand what tools like makepkg do before using a frontend like yaourt, because most tools like yaourt use makepkg to perform builds

>man git
>man makepkg

for more info


I've never used it so I can't really say, I've been an archer for some time now and I don't feel inclined to switch

that's a relief, so even as the ubuntu user said , pacman is going to identify custom folders with the packages.

Not him, but I played it with a bit recently to test something. Software repos are pretty bare. I don't see why you'd want to use it for a desktop. There are better systemd-free distros.

That's the whole point of a pkgbuild:

>A PKGBUILD is a shell script containing the build information required by Arch Linux packages.

>Packages in Arch Linux are built using the makepkg utility. When makepkg is run, it searches for a PKGBUILD file in the current directory and follows the instructions therein to either compile or otherwise acquire the files to build a package archive (pkgname.pkg.tar.xz). The resulting package contains binary files and installation instructions, readily installable with pacman.

basically thats what happens. you download and build the package's source code, and then makepkg creates a "package" just like you would download from Arch's repositories, then makepkg uses pacman to install the package it just built so you can use pacman to interact with it, like other packages installed with pacman

see

mmmm that is very interesting. maybe when i figure out how to transfer my programs from one distro to another distro i will try arch. Or maybe manjaro, i heard it is the most user freindly of RR distros.

already answered

I've used manjaro before but found no benefit to using it over arch. part of my draw to arch is its wiki and forums. most of the time when I am troubleshooting something the answer comes from the wiki or a post on their forum. As for moving programs from one distro to another, you can attempt to move the executables over, but odds are unless you have your environments configured almost identically you'll have to reinstall. My suggestion is to find a package manager that you really like, and learn how to use it well and installing software with it becomes super simple.


are there programs in particular that you're concerned about not having on a linux environment?

>My suggestion is to find a package manager that you really like, and learn how to use it well and installing software with it becomes super simple.
that wasn't clear, I meant in terms of finding a distro you want to use, find a package manager that you like, then find distros that use it, then make your decision. for me it was the documentation and community, there are other reasons to pick a distro, but this isn't my work development machine so I'm not really tied to any sort of technical restrictions with it, but you might find you have some reason for choosing one distro over another because of some technical reason (systemd, package manager, etc)

well mostly avoiding spyware, i can tolerate proprietary programs if they are trusty enough.
i also need the DE to be beautifull. other than that, i need my games, so i need steam and all the emulators that you can find on ubuntu to be easy to find.

oh i don't know much about package managers, maybe i will google that to find my own conclusions.

git clone aur.archlinux.org/yourpackage
cd yourpackage
makepkg -si

Then use cower -u to check whenever you have to update
To update do
cd yourpackage
git pull

wait isn't -Syu just enough?

>not icecat

it is for packages that are maintained in the standard arch repos. because those packages contain prebuilt binaries, theres no need to rebuild source code.

AUR packages are not part of the standard arch repo, and are generally built from source by the user. because pacman can't download and rebuild from a package's source code, the user has to do that by doing something like
suggests

>wew i guess i am going to live with spyware browsers then.
Entirely your own decision.

>just download source from the aur and cd into the directory and makepkg -i
why would i ever do that when yaourt does literally exactly that without me having to manually download the source

then use pacaur

read the rest of the thread dildohead

isn't that dead, as in no one's maintaining it anymore?

>don't use yaourt

why?

It's my favorite distribution for docker containers, it's extremely lightweight: I guess the base system container is about 12MB.
I would not suggest it for desktop use as I personally never tried it that way, I can recommend Void Linux if you have some time to spare to learn another unique distro.

nope and it's better than yaourt

???

Honestly just install gentoo if you're fine with compiling your packages yourself

pacaur

always pacaur

not maintained, but works
I'm using it. It is great. I hardly had to configure anything.

Use cower you dingus

>yaourt
pleb, aur is meant for real users