Damn, that game’s still going, eh? (/j)
Originally it was called puckman, but they changed it because it would have been too easy to vandalize people’s arch installations
You win!
going full open source 😎
pacman is my favorite game on Arch.
[- - - - - - - - - - - -C o o o o o o o o o]
This is exciting! Can’t wait to kill my install by trying to upgrade!
I mean you don’t really use Arch if you don’t bork it once in a while. :)
That’s a very pleasant word for a horrible experience I keep doing to myself.
If anything, i would expect packagekit frontends to break. If you use pacman as intended, you’ll be just fine
You can run pacman on Windows?
It’s called Ms. PacMan over there
Clever.
yes (msys2) except it will never bork your windows install unlike on arch.
Kinda. One of the Linux “wrappers” (I’m a bit tired and can’t think of the correct term here, bear with me) that lets you utilize some Linux utilities on Windows, maybe it was mingw or cygwin, actually uses pacman as their package manager IIRC.
msys2.
Yep that’s the one, thanks!
- On Linux systems, ensure the download process does not write outside the download directory
What does that mean “On Linux systems”? Pacman is available for non Linux systems?
The MSYS2 environment on Windows uses pacman as well.
Pacman was birthed from the Arch ecosystem, but it’s built to be generalized so any project can use it if they choose.
arch = base.tarball[0] + pacman [0] 90% similar to all other linux tarballsI’m genuinely not sure what you’re saying here…
The base tarball that separates Arch from Debian or Gentoo differ in very minor structural ways, but the difference is the way they fetch, parse, and install packages is huge.
Given this small difference in base tarballs, one can make the case the Arch codebase is the pacman codebase.
I mean… Yeah…? It’s not all that controversial to say that any distro is essentially just glue between several pieces of software…
What’s your point?
(not quite sure where the hostility is coming from, but) if you agree that the base tarball of the distro is inconsequential, then one could argue that the package manager is the actual distro.
That is, using pacman on Windows is akin to an Arch installation on windows.
Apologies, hostility wasn’t my intention, only seeking understanding.
Ya know, in the context of the software in a vacuum, sure. But I think I’ll ammend what I said earlier about what constitutes a distro:
IMO, It’s not just software that glues other existing software together into a contiguous OS, but also a staff, a community, a philosophy cast on that collection of software. A way of doing things and thinking about them. Decisions and the rationale for them, a history of iteration, user needs and how those needs are filled. Us soft squishy humans that make, maintain, modify, administer, use, and complain about the software.
Because I think that reducing a distro to only the software it produces or uses fails to paint the whole picture. The mechanisms used for managing the collection of software on any specific machine is only one part of a larger system.
Pacman isn’t the only part of Arch, and Arch isn’t just pacman. The same is true if you
s/Arch/MSYS2/gon that statement.
deleted by creator
Can you do makepkg in the clone of yay PKGBUILD from aur? That seems like a better solution than symlinking…
I did this. And it worked like a charm
That’s how you’re supposed to use AUR, I think. All yay, paru, etc do is make it convenient to do that while also helping with searching and upgrading them.
This is the correct thing to do when it breaks, recompile and link against the new libs. Otherwise you could see funny behaviour.
