<SOLVED>Updating a package from the AUR

Fred Barclay · 2015-07-03 18:20:36

Guys, I hope this is in the right place. Mods, feel free to move it as needed.

Is there a way to upgrade packages I installed from the AUR without manually grabbing the newer packages myself, and without using yaourt?
I've installed ttf-moscorefonts-installer (MS fonts; I know, I know, but I needed them for LibreOffice), and I'm looking at installing Google Chrome (Chromium just won't cut it for me), and I need to know if I will be responsible for manually upgrading the packages.
Everything I've read online mentioned yaourt, which I've heard is better not to use ( http://jasonwryan.com/blog/2013/04/09/helpers/ ), so I installed ttf-mscorefonts-installer via mkpkg and pacman -U. I plan on doing the same for Chrome.

Sorry for the newbie question. This is my second foray into Arch, and I think I'm here to stay, but sometimes it gets so confusing...
Thanks!
Fred

Last edited by Fred Barclay (2015-07-04 15:22:50)

ewaller · 2015-07-03 18:30:46

Personally, I use packer. My colleagues prefer cower.

Alad · 2015-07-03 18:39:21

cd ~/src/foo && git pull

Also use makepkg -i instead of makepkg + pacman -U

Last edited by Alad (2015-07-03 18:40:09)

Trilby · 2015-07-03 18:47:34

Alad wrote:

cd ~/src/foo && git pull
Also use makepkg -i instead of makepkg + pacman -U

Yup. With AUR4 this will be / is trivially easy.

But there is nothing wrong with using AUR helpers if a you really know how to handle all the AUR tasks manually - so when something goes wrong you are more capable of figuring it out and you will take reasonable steps rather than flailing about yelling 'HALP, yaourt doesn't update ...'

In all fairness, yaourt could be fine if the above condition were met. The problem with yaourt is much less the software itself (though I certainly have some gripes there too) but the main problem is that yaourt is marketted to those who really shouldn't be using *any* aur helper. The "just install yaourt and don't think about it" is a mind virus that needs to go away - but I'd say much the same if anyone was out preaching "just install cower and don't think about it."

Think first. Then if/when you want a tool to help automate some of the steps, check out the options (there are lots of them listed in the wiki) and pick one that works for you.

But as predicted by ewaller, I'm fond of cower.

Fred Barclay · 2015-07-03 21:58:32

Thanks, guys.

Trilby and ewaller, would either/both of you be interested in explaining why you like the particular AUR tool you use? I'd appreciate any input.
Fred

jasonwryan · 2015-07-03 22:25:16

cower is favoured by a lot of the old timers because it is the simplest and least bloatedabstracted. If you want more complexity with cower, use meat.

progandy · 2015-07-03 22:57:46

jasonwryan wrote:

cower is favoured by a lot of the old timers because it is the simplest and least bloatedabstracted. If you want more complexity with cower, use meat.

Others simply start with their own shell scripts and add functionality they need. I am not an old timer, but I have my custom cower-like luajit script. It supports searching, aur4 git pulls (no normal downloads) and a list of updated packages sorted in dependency order (optionally with missing AUR dependencies), but nothing else. Low priority long term plans are update notifications for vcs controlled packages and aybe improved dependency sorting grouped by package base.

Last edited by progandy (2015-07-03 22:59:43)

Trilby · 2015-07-03 23:43:06

I had my own little aur downloader 'helper' script for a while. But there were a few corner cases that it'd screw up on. I figured I'd rewrite it someday. Then I found cower, and it's pretty much exactly what I would have written (or would have hoped I'd write) if I ever took the time to. It's simple, small and with no dependencies that I didn't already have, and it stays out of my way and just handles the tedious parts while leaving me in control of building stuff.

But like quite a few other I actually started arch with yaourt - and I regret it. It hindered my learning for quite a while. Once I got rid of yaourt I had the opportunity not only to learn, but quickly come to the realization that the AUR is actually much *easier* than yaourt made it seem.

ewaller · 2015-07-04 04:16:08

Packer works for me. It has never hurt me, or disappointed me. If it gets confused, it stops. It provides the right level of obfuscation the difference between real packages and the scary stuff in the AUR without making them appear equivalent. WTF does that mean? I don't know. Mind you, Linux is not a mystery for me. When it breaks, I am fully capable of rolling up my sleeves and doing battle at a really low level to fix things when they break. The nice thing about Linux is that things are pretty deterministic when you drag out the low level tools.

In my mind, Yaourt pretends they are the same and obfuscates the differences; then leaves you holding your d--k in your hand whilst wondering what to do after it barfs.

Fred Barclay · 2015-07-04 15:22:34

Thanks, everyone.
I'm now trying to decide between cower and packer. Cower has less dependencies...

Last edited by Fred Barclay (2015-07-04 16:02:14)

Raynman · 2015-07-04 15:51:21

Fred Barclay wrote:

Thanks, everyone.
I'm now trying to decide between cower and packer. Cower has less dependencies...

You could also check out pacaur (which uses cower for AUR) if you want some of the obfuscation that ewaller was talking about.

Buddlespit · 2015-07-04 16:21:08

Trilby wrote:

In all fairness, yaourt could be fine if the above condition were met. The problem with yaourt is much less the software itself (though I certainly have some gripes there too) but the main problem is that yaourt is marketted to those who really shouldn't be using *any* aur helper. The "just install yaourt and don't think about it" is a mind virus that needs to go away - but I'd say much the same if anyone was out preaching "just install cower and don't think about it."

You don't know how much I appreciate someone in authority saying this. I pull from abs and adjust the PKGBUILD to my tastes. I pull from AUR/AUR4 and adjust the PKGBUILD to my tastes. But for the most part, I use yaourt and octopi. It bothers me when I see mods hollering "DON'T USE YAOURT!!!". It's refreshing to see someone say "Yaourt isn't the prefered method, but it's ok if you already know how to edit the PKGBUILD and manually build and install your apps"

ewaller · 2015-07-04 18:06:27

Buddlespit wrote:

It bothers me when I see mods hollering "DON'T USE YAOURT!!!". It's refreshing to see someone say "Yaourt isn't the prefered method, but it's ok if you already know how to edit the PKGBUILD and manually build and install your apps"

You are right. As a moderator I can say I have a bias against it mostly because its misuse causes so many problems that wind up here as help requests.

Arch Linux

#1 2015-07-03 18:20:36

<SOLVED>Updating a package from the AUR

#2 2015-07-03 18:30:46

Re: <SOLVED>Updating a package from the AUR

#3 2015-07-03 18:39:21

Re: <SOLVED>Updating a package from the AUR

#4 2015-07-03 18:47:34

Re: <SOLVED>Updating a package from the AUR

#5 2015-07-03 21:58:32

Re: <SOLVED>Updating a package from the AUR

#6 2015-07-03 22:25:16

Re: <SOLVED>Updating a package from the AUR

#7 2015-07-03 22:57:46

Re: <SOLVED>Updating a package from the AUR

#8 2015-07-03 23:43:06

Re: <SOLVED>Updating a package from the AUR

#9 2015-07-04 04:16:08

Re: <SOLVED>Updating a package from the AUR

#10 2015-07-04 15:22:34

Re: <SOLVED>Updating a package from the AUR

#11 2015-07-04 15:51:21

Re: <SOLVED>Updating a package from the AUR

#12 2015-07-04 16:21:08

Re: <SOLVED>Updating a package from the AUR

#13 2015-07-04 18:06:27

Re: <SOLVED>Updating a package from the AUR

Board footer