( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

wbeyda · 2010-01-14 01:13:51

BTW how do I remove wicd now ?

Allan · 2010-01-14 01:17:16

You should read:

man pacman

or the pacman page on the wiki. It gives a good overview of all the commands that you will want to know.

Bysshe · 2010-01-14 02:35:59

Yeah, I love the man pacman command. Any question regarding pacman is on that terminal page somewhere. quick and easy to call up. I sometimes forget rarely used switches. If there's a need for it, pacman can do it. Amazing package control. It's practically one of the biggest reasons I use Arch, besides the fact that Arch package builders and maintainers try to avoid unnecessary dependencies and convoluted configurations. A criticism many distros shamelessly own.

IgnorantGuru · 2010-01-14 03:12:29

Bysshe wrote:

Yeah, I love the man pacman command. Any question regarding pacman is on that terminal page somewhere. quick and easy to call up. I sometimes forget rarely used switches. If there's a need for it, pacman can do it. Amazing package control. It's practically one of the biggest reasons I use Arch, besides the fact that Arch package builders and maintainers try to avoid unnecessary dependencies and convoluted configurations. A criticism many distros shamelessly own.

Well I've been using Arch for a few months now and I really like it. I like the way the package maintainers keep things 'as upstream intended' instead of all the ridiculous mods that distros like Ubuntu do. When I switched to Arch so many bugs disappeared - turned out they were not upstream.

But dependencies I am still not very pleased with. So many packages that I have absolutely no use for - just to keep pacman happy. My guess is the maintainers honor the upstream definitions of 'required' dependencies, which include every package a package MIGHT use. For apps like KDE apps this gets really ridiculous. Akonadi to run kmail? Give me a break. I wouldn't use akonadi at gunpoint, and kmail certainly runs fine without it. I could make a long list of such waste.

The good news is that most of the time Arch doesn't start all the installed stuff automatically like Ubuntu does. It just sits there taking up disk space but not running. There are exceptions. The most recent surprise was finding a .gvfs folder in my home folder that root couldn't enter. And then I found FUSE running. Something to do with libgnome. (I don't use gnome but have a few gnome apps). I certainly don't need FUSE running a userspace filesystem. And nuking the FUSE daemon put an end to it, and broke nothing.

So I think the whole dependency thing could be reworked with a little more latitude for the user. If I break my system let me worry about that. I don't like the way pacman doesn't let you override a dependency and remove it (at least no way I have found besides deleting the files myself).

But Arch gets good grades from me - my best linux experience so far. I think Arch community could be a little more friendly and patient with newbies - I don't like some of the hostility. But I also understand where it comes from - RTFM!

Allan · 2010-01-14 03:14:41

IgnorantGuru wrote:

So I think the whole dependency thing could be reworked with a little more latitude for the user. If I break my system let me worry about that. I don't like the way pacman doesn't let you override a dependency and remove it (at least no way I have found besides deleting the files myself).

man pacman

It is there.... Specifically "-Rd". Not recommended unless you are prepared to break things.

wbeyda · 2010-01-14 03:20:07

I'm trying to install splashy but it says I need to build a package how do I build a package?

http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/ … ent=116333
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=27916

IgnorantGuru · 2010-01-14 03:24:26

Allan wrote:

It is there.... Specifically "-Rd". Not recommended unless you are prepared to break things.

Very cool... so pacman -Rd akonadi will let me remove it, and it won't be reinstalled with the next full update I do? That is what I want to be able to do.

I love breaking things... then I learn how they work. (I also keep good backups so I can roll my system back.)

IgnorantGuru · 2010-01-14 03:29:18

Seemed to work... I removed akonadi then did a full update, which found nothing to be done. Thanks!

I think tomorrow I shall go on a delete-fest!

ngoonee · 2010-01-14 03:30:15

IgnorantGuru wrote:

Seemed to work... I removed akonadi then did a full update, which found nothing to be done. Thanks!
I think tomorrow I shall go on a delete-fest!

Breakage guarunteed.

Allan · 2010-01-14 03:32:08

ngoonee wrote:

IgnorantGuru wrote:
Seemed to work... I removed akonadi then did a full update, which found nothing to be done. Thanks!
I think tomorrow I shall go on a delete-fest!
Breakage guarunteed.

Agreed...

If the package that needed akonadi requires and update, it will likely be pulled in again. The best way around this is to create a fake package which has "provides=('akonadi' 'something'...)" in it and install that package. You might need a version there to help with versioned dependencies (e.g. 'akondai=999').

lucke · 2010-01-14 03:33:11

I think you won't be able to run Kmail without Akonadi in KDE 4.4, GNOME mounts that .gvfs and it'd be a bit difficult to run GNOME apps without GNOME libs, you can override dependencies with -(S|R)d switch, I don't see anything wrong with the attitude of the majority of forum regulars against most newbies - attitude of some newbies is their own downfall.

IgnorantGuru · 2010-01-14 03:37:24

ngoonee wrote:

Breakage guarunteed.

lol Actually not really. I mainly have in mind some packages that I KNOW I don't need, because I know what they do and I used to use KDE. Like the evil akonadi, soprano, and nepomuk. I have a script that already moves their files into a 'disabled' folder, so its just a matter of officially removing them.

I might muck around a bit more to see if I can break something - then I will know what is required. I actually don't mind small, harmless dependencies. There are just certain ones that annoy me. FUSE is going for sure - I'll see if that breaks anything. I doubt it since I already nuked its files.

IgnorantGuru · 2010-01-14 03:42:30

lucke wrote:

I think you won't be able to run Kmail without Akonadi in KDE 4.4

I actually don't use KDE, just a few apps. If kmail ever requires akonadi running, it will be time for a new email client - which it already is, I just haven't found one as capable as kmail yet (filters to execute commands on emails, not displaying html by default but allowing it with a click, etc).

GNOME mounts that .gvfs and it'd be a bit difficult to run GNOME apps without GNOME libs

Well I killed FUSE and the gnome apps still work.

I don't see anything wrong with the attitude of the majority of forum regulars against most newbies - attitude of some newbies is their own downfall.

Most of the regulars are helpful. Just sometimes I see people becoming impatient with questions they've heard thousands of times before - but that is the nature of experience, and newbie corner is obviously going to contain old questions.

IgnorantGuru · 2010-01-14 03:45:01

Allan wrote:

If the package that needed akonadi requires and update, it will likely be pulled in again. The best way around this is to create a fake package which has "provides=('akonadi' 'something'...)" in it and install that package. You might need a version there to help with versioned dependencies (e.g. 'akondai=999').

I haven't gotten into building packages yet, but thanks for the heads up. I think it will be easier for now to write a script that monitors the packages and deletes them if they reappear. It would be nice if they had a way to mark the package as 'user does not allow install, ignore requirements'. That is really what I want. But -Rd is a good half-measure I can work with.

GentleGiant · 2010-01-14 07:07:01

wbeyda wrote:

BTW how do I remove wicd now ?

Pacman -Rs wicd
/etc/rc.d/wicd stop

tomk · 2010-01-14 07:51:21

wbeyda wrote:

I'm trying to install splashy but it says I need to build a package how do I build a package?
http://gnome-look.org/content/show.php/ … ent=116333
http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=27916

Follow your nose.. or your mouse, at least. From the aur link above, go to AUR Home, then AUR User Guidelines.

In general, the wiki has everything you need. Please look there before asking simple questions here.

IgnorantGuru · 2010-01-16 01:53:39

Allan wrote:

If the package that needed akonadi requires and update, it will likely be pulled in again. The best way around this is to create a fake package which has "provides=('akonadi' 'something'...)" in it and install that package. You might need a version there to help with versioned dependencies (e.g. 'akondai=999').

Done - see what you started?
http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=88889

Really I think that ability should be part of pacman - all it would take would be one blacklist file in /etc/pacman for it to consult. Maybe you can throw your weight around and have that implemented. Also one for holding a package at an older version. As much as devs hate things like that, sometimes its very helpful while we're waiting for the devs to fix things.

PirateJonno · 2010-01-18 11:47:47

you can hold a package at an older version - use IgnorePkg in /etc/pacman.conf (read 'man pacman.conf' for more details)

IgnorantGuru · 2010-01-18 14:02:09

PirateJonno wrote:

you can hold a package at an older version - use IgnorePkg in /etc/pacman.conf (read 'man pacman.conf' for more details)

Good to know.

Arch Linux

#26 2010-01-14 01:13:51

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#27 2010-01-14 01:17:16

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#28 2010-01-14 02:35:59

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#29 2010-01-14 03:12:29

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#30 2010-01-14 03:14:41

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#31 2010-01-14 03:20:07

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#32 2010-01-14 03:24:26

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#33 2010-01-14 03:29:18

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#34 2010-01-14 03:30:15

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#35 2010-01-14 03:32:08

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#36 2010-01-14 03:33:11

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#37 2010-01-14 03:37:24

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#38 2010-01-14 03:42:30

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#39 2010-01-14 03:45:01

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#40 2010-01-14 07:07:01

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#41 2010-01-14 07:51:21

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#42 2010-01-16 01:53:39

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#43 2010-01-18 11:47:47

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

#44 2010-01-18 14:02:09

Re: ( Not Solved) Arch user comming from Ubuntu

Board footer