I might've broken my pacman somehow?

SimbaClaws · 2014-05-30 09:09:26

Apparently I'm unable to install any new packages with pacman.
Currently my only way of installing packages is through pacaur -S for some reason.
This seems to work fine when getting the package from the AUR repo, although when I run any of the commands for the packages that I installed it says that the command is not found.
Previously installed packages can be executed for some reason.

When I use compgen -c | grep mypackage it doesn't return anything.

For pacman it says target not found when typing in any legitimate package.

I'm running pacaur -S under a non-root user.
pacman -Syu runs just fine.

Does anyone have any idea where I should look to resolve the issue?

Currently this is my pacman.conf:

#
# /etc/pacman.conf
#
# See the pacman.conf(5) manpage for option and repository directives

#
# GENERAL OPTIONS
#
[options]
# The following paths are commented out with their default values listed.
# If you wish to use different paths, uncomment and update the paths.
#RootDir     = /
#DBPath      = /var/lib/pacman/
#CacheDir    = /var/cache/pacman/pkg/
#LogFile     = /var/log/pacman.log
#GPGDir      = /etc/pacman.d/gnupg/
HoldPkg     = pacman glibc
#XferCommand = /usr/bin/curl -C - -f %u > %o
#XferCommand = /usr/bin/wget --passive-ftp -c -O %o %u
#CleanMethod = KeepInstalled
#UseDelta    = 0.7
Architecture = auto

# Pacman won't upgrade packages listed in IgnorePkg and members of IgnoreGroup
#IgnorePkg   =
#IgnoreGroup =

#NoUpgrade   =
#NoExtract   =

# Misc options
ILoveCandy
#UseSyslog
#Color
#TotalDownload
CheckSpace
#VerbosePkgLists

# By default, pacman accepts packages signed by keys that its local keyring
# trusts (see pacman-key and its man page), as well as unsigned packages.
SigLevel    = Required DatabaseOptional
LocalFileSigLevel = Optional
#RemoteFileSigLevel = Required

# NOTE: You must run `pacman-key --init` before first using pacman; the local
# keyring can then be populated with the keys of all official Arch Linux
# packagers with `pacman-key --populate archlinux`.

#
# REPOSITORIES
#   - can be defined here or included from another file
#   - pacman will search repositories in the order defined here
#   - local/custom mirrors can be added here or in separate files
#   - repositories listed first will take precedence when packages
#     have identical names, regardless of version number
#   - URLs will have $repo replaced by the name of the current repo
#   - URLs will have $arch replaced by the name of the architecture
#
# Repository entries are of the format:
#       [repo-name]
#       Server = ServerName
#       Include = IncludePath
#
# The header [repo-name] is crucial - it must be present and
# uncommented to enable the repo.
#

# The testing repositories are disabled by default. To enable, uncomment the
# repo name header and Include lines. You can add preferred servers immediately
# after the header, and they will be used before the default mirrors.

#[testing]
#Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist

[core]
Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist

[extra]
Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist

#[community-testing]
#Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist

[community]
Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist

# If you want to run 32 bit applications on your x86_64 system,
# enable the multilib repositories as required here.

#[multilib-testing]
#Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist

[multilib]
Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist

# An example of a custom package repository.  See the pacman manpage for
# tips on creating your own repositories.
#[custom]
#SigLevel = Optional TrustAll
#Server = file:///home/custompkgs

Last edited by SimbaClaws (2014-05-30 09:17:42)

WorMzy · 2014-05-30 09:19:40

Could you have aliased 'pacman' as something else? Check with 'type pacman'.

Assuming it isn't an alias, post the full output of

# /usr/bin/pacman -S --debug filesystem

Preferably using a pastebin.

Awebb · 2014-05-30 09:20:17

Please post the actual terminal output. Nothing is irrelevant.

WorMzy · 2014-05-30 09:23:29

Also, what is the "ILoveCandy" option? I can't find anything in the man pages about it.

SimbaClaws · 2014-05-30 09:25:06

WorMzy wrote:

Could you have aliased 'pacman' as something else? Check with 'type pacman'.
Assuming it isn't an alias, post the full output of
# /usr/bin/pacman -S --debug filesystem
Preferably using a pastebin.

type pacman
pacman is /usr/bin/pacman

http://pastebin.com/w73qBeDi Should I proceed with the installation of filesystem?

WorMzy wrote:

Also, what is the "ILoveCandy" option? I can't find anything in the man pages about it.

It shows a little pacman figure eating up the remaining percentages when running pacman

Last edited by SimbaClaws (2014-05-30 09:28:09)

WorMzy · 2014-05-30 09:33:09

No, there's no need to continue with that installation. Could you re-run the command with a 'legitimate' package that gives you the error?

It shows a little pacman figure eating up the remaining percentages when running pacman

Ah, I see it's on the pacman Arch wiki page. You could try disabling it temporarily, though I don't think it would be causing problems.

SimbaClaws · 2014-05-30 09:41:24

WorMzy wrote:

No, there's no need to continue with that installation. Could you re-run the command with a 'legitimate' package that gives you the error?
It shows a little pacman figure eating up the remaining percentages when running pacman
Ah, I see it's on the pacman Arch wiki page. You could try disabling it temporarily, though I don't think it would be causing problems.

flamingbird ~ $ sudo pacman -S Eterm
[sudo] password for flamingbird: 
error: target not found: Eterm
flamingbird ~ $ sudo pacman -S aterm
error: target not found: aterm
flamingbird ~ $ sudo pacman -S bashish
error: target not found: bashish

hmmm ok maybe they weren't available through pacman after all >.>

still though after installing bashish or Eterm through pacaur -S I can't run them in bash?

flamingbird ~ $ bashish
bash: bashish: command not found
flamingbird ~ $ Eterm
bash: Eterm: command not found
flamingbird ~ $ eterm
bash: eterm: command not found

Last edited by SimbaClaws (2014-05-30 09:42:21)

jasonwryan · 2014-05-30 09:45:45

What's the output of `uname -a` and `pacman -Q linux`?

SimbaClaws · 2014-05-30 09:47:14

flamingbird ~ $ uname -a
Linux brokenashes 3.14.4-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue May 13 16:41:39 CEST 2014 x86_64 GNU/Linux
flamingbird ~ $ pacman -Q linux
linux 3.14.4-1

tomk · 2014-05-30 09:48:41

Would you please leave pacaur and the AUR out of this? You asked for help with pacman.

As already requested, use pacman to install a package from the official repos, and post the entire output here.

WorMzy · 2014-05-30 09:51:08

No, neither of those packages are available in the repositories. They are available in the AUR though. I recommend that you put pacaur aside for now, and re-read the wiki pages about what the AUR is, and how you make packages from it. Try making a package using makepkg, and see if you get any errors.

SimbaClaws · 2014-05-30 09:58:06

My sincere apoligies for wasting your time, I should've read better.
I might just have missunderstood the concept of the official repositories entirely.

I'll try to install something from the official repository and post the result. It may just be working fine, my inexperience might've been the problem -,-...

Yet again my apoligies:

sudo pacman -S arp-scan
[sudo] password for flamingbird: 
oplossen van afhankelijkheden...
controle van interne conflicten...

Packages (3): libnl-3.2.24-1  libpcap-1.5.3-1  arp-scan-1.9-1

Total Download Size:    0,68 MiB
Total Installed Size:   2,30 MiB

:: Proceed with installation? [Y/n]

Pacman seems to work just fine. I'm just having issues with getting bashish to work I suppose.
The title in this thread is missleading then. Should I change it?

WorMzy wrote:

No, neither of those packages are available in the repositories. They are available in the AUR though. I recommend that you put pacaur aside for now, and re-read the wiki pages about what the AUR is, and how you make packages from it. Try making a package using makepkg, and see if you get any errors.

I'll try building bashish manually with makepkg then. Thanks for the support!

Last edited by SimbaClaws (2014-05-30 10:08:15)

WorMzy · 2014-05-30 10:20:10

bashish is horribly outdated. Neither the AUR package or the software itself has seen an update in over four years. I'm not sure it's a good choice of package to help you get used to the AUR..

eterm would be a better choice, but be aware that it has a dependency on another AUR package, which you will need to build first.

ANOKNUSA · 2014-05-30 15:32:05

SimbaClaws wrote:

The title in this thread is missleading then. Should I change it?

For the time being that would be a good idea, but his thread may wind up being superfluous. If you're having a problem building a particular AUR package, the first course of action should be to leave a comment for its maintainer on the package's AUR page, rather than opening a topic in the forums.

For now, I'd recommend following WorMzy's advice above, with a slight alteration: If you have a package installed from the official repositories (preferably from [community]) that has a counterpart in the AUR, try building that AUR counterpart as a test. If the package you choose for the test builds with makepkg without error, the problem isn't makepkg; if it builds without error using with pacaur, the problem isn't pacaur. If it installs, the problem isn't pacman. The only remaining possibility is that the problem is in the bashish package itself. These days I use cower + makepkg for AUR packages, but back when I used yaourt and Packer that was how I tested packages that wouldn't build.

Arch Linux

#1 2014-05-30 09:09:26

I might've broken my pacman somehow?

#2 2014-05-30 09:19:40

Re: I might've broken my pacman somehow?

#3 2014-05-30 09:20:17

Re: I might've broken my pacman somehow?

#4 2014-05-30 09:23:29

Re: I might've broken my pacman somehow?

#5 2014-05-30 09:25:06

Re: I might've broken my pacman somehow?

#6 2014-05-30 09:33:09

Re: I might've broken my pacman somehow?

#7 2014-05-30 09:41:24

Re: I might've broken my pacman somehow?

#8 2014-05-30 09:45:45

Re: I might've broken my pacman somehow?

#9 2014-05-30 09:47:14

Re: I might've broken my pacman somehow?

#10 2014-05-30 09:48:41

Re: I might've broken my pacman somehow?

#11 2014-05-30 09:51:08

Re: I might've broken my pacman somehow?

#12 2014-05-30 09:58:06

Re: I might've broken my pacman somehow?

#13 2014-05-30 10:20:10

Re: I might've broken my pacman somehow?

#14 2014-05-30 15:32:05

Re: I might've broken my pacman somehow?

Board footer