Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22

Thread: GNOME Software 3.14 Will Work On Arch Linux With PackageKit

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,102

    Default GNOME Software 3.14 Will Work On Arch Linux With PackageKit

    Phoronix: GNOME Software 3.14 Will Work On Arch Linux With PackageKit

    Those running GNOME on Arch Linux should be pleased that with the upcoming GNOME 3.14 release that the GNOME Software application should finally play well with PackageKit's Pacman back-end...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTc4NDQ

  2. #2

    Default

    Without Gnome Software it is much more difficult to create categories in the overview screen to organize your application shortcuts. So it's really nice this has been added to Arch.

    For those sticking with 3.12 for a while you can get this program: https://github.com/prurigro/gnome-catgen and you can create category folders from the command line.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    123

    Default

    Wow, Arch has been stuck on PackageKit 7.6 for a while now. Lots of thanks to Richard Hughes for updating the pacman backend of PackageKit. Though, as odd, as it sounds, the Packagekit package in Arch's community repo is about 9 months old!

    Also, I believe the APT backend was replaced by the aptcc (written from scratch by dantti the Apper developer in c/c++ instead of Python).
    Last edited by CTown; 09-09-2014 at 05:31 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CTown View Post
    Wow, Arch has been stuck on PackageKit 7.6 for a while now. Lots of thanks to Richard Hughes for updating the pacman backend of PackageKit. Though, as odd, as it sounds, the Packagekit package in Arch's community repo is about 9 months old!

    Also, I believe the APT backend was replaced by the aptcc (written from scratch by dantti the Apper developer in c/c++ instead of Python).
    Its older than 9 months isn't it? I was complaining about a severely out-dated PackageKit last year and none of the devs really seemed to care about making sure PackageKit was up to par

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    551

    Default

    This should also mean Apper runs nicer under Arch for the KDE folk. I use it a lot to casually install libraries if I don't want to type pacman -Sy and then pacman -S (yeah, that lazy).

    The Chakra project has been whole-scale forking pacman because it apparently does not play nice as a package library.

    I wonder if packagekit is ever going to get AUR support, though. If it did, it would kill Ocotopi and its ilk since that is really the only reason the DE specific package apps are unusable under Arch.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    88

    Default

    I looked up things but still can't understand why I should care about PackageKit when I use Arch. I mean for half decade of using Arch this is the first time I hear about it.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    551

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by magika View Post
    I looked up things but still can't understand why I should care about PackageKit when I use Arch. I mean for half decade of using Arch this is the first time I hear about it.
    Either you have a common package backend (packagekit) that all GUI package managers can write against, or you have format-dependent GUIs like Aptitude or Yast.

    Gnome / KDE come with their own software GUIs, and use packagekit because it is insanely time consuming to write backends for every distro they run on.

    And packagekit support is probably one of the stronger limits on seeing more widespread Arch derivatives used as mainstream distros. The Pacman GUIs are not up to snuff (I think the Gnome based one is pretty good, though) for most end users needs.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zanny View Post
    This should also mean Apper runs nicer under Arch for the KDE folk. I use it a lot to casually install libraries if I don't want to type pacman -Sy and then pacman -S (yeah, that lazy).
    .
    Pacman -Sy package

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    88

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zanny View Post
    Either you have a common package backend (packagekit) that all GUI package managers can write against, or you have format-dependent GUIs like Aptitude or Yast.

    Gnome / KDE come with their own software GUIs, and use packagekit because it is insanely time consuming to write backends for every distro they run on.

    And packagekit support is probably one of the stronger limits on seeing more widespread Arch derivatives used as mainstream distros. The Pacman GUIs are not up to snuff (I think the Gnome based one is pretty good, though) for most end users needs.
    I thought pacman on its own is simple yet powerful enough to suit most people needs to not warrant need of GUI.
    I still remeber days of OpenSUSE where graphical package manager was overcomplicated and I had a misfortune of using Ubuntu's GUI, which can't tell you what it wants to do or why things have failed.
    However having used apt-get I can clearly see why most people need GUI when using such distros.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    796

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kokoko3k View Post
    Pacman -Sy package
    Have fun breaking your system that way.
    https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php...re_unsupported
    Last edited by blackout23; 09-10-2014 at 06:52 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •