-122

nuclear take:(lemmy.world)

posted
by
Avatar
DanTDM@lemmy.world
in
Avatar
linuxmemes@lemmy.world
73 comments
hidereport
Sort:
HotTopControversialNewOld
You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
Avatar
Björn Tantau@swg-empire.de
14 points
*

Serious question: What makes Arch’s package manager so “great”? I always just found it confusing to use. The flags don’t make any sense to me. It feels like you have to add a varying number of s or y to get it to do what you want. I never found it to be any faster or slower than any of the others (apart from portage of course) out there. And apart from the flags it doesn’t seem to give me any more or less trouble than the others.

permalink
report
reply
Avatar
WFH@lemm.ee
12 points

pacman -Snstall -yefresh -yefresh -unly-upgrades

permalink
report
parent
reply
Avatar
PlasticExistence@lemmy.world
6 points

User is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.

permalink
report
parent
reply
Avatar
AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works
3 points

LOL, me using Debian for the first time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
Show more comments
Avatar
exu@feditown.com
5 points

As a user it’s definitely harder to get into than apt or dnf. However, as a packager, it’s very easy to package new applications for pacman. That’s also why the AUR offers this many packages often not found in other distros.

permalink
report
parent
reply
Avatar
Encamped@lemmy.ml
4 points

It’s fast. That’s why it’s great. I’ve considered switching to opensuse a lot, but the speed of pacman compared to how slow zypper is always drags me back to arch

permalink
report
parent
reply
Avatar
Peasley@lemmy.world
2 points
*

Wow I must be doing something wrong, zypper has always been faster for me than pacman, both on my newer desktop and my older laptop

permalink
report
parent
reply
Avatar
Encamped@lemmy.ml
1 point

I’ve heard countless times it’s one of the slowest package managers and the last time I tried opensuse it confirmed that, though that was a year ago, so I guess improvements have been made

permalink
report
parent
reply
Avatar
lemmyreader@lemmy.ml
4 points

Dunno. Anecdotal, a few years ago pacman appeared to be much faster than apt-get for me. Currently I don’t see that very much difference but then again I haven’t paid much attention to it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
Avatar
ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world
1 point

there’s nala as an upgrade to apt, but pacman iirc has a few more features still

permalink
report
parent
reply
Avatar
VeganCheesecake@lemmy.blahaj.zone
2 points
*

I use tumbleweed on my desktop, but run arch on a secondary machine. From experience, pacman is much faster than zypper, even on a slower machine.

permalink
report
parent
reply

linuxmemes

!linuxmemes@lemmy.world

Create post

Hint: :q!

Sister communities:

Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules
2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of “peasantry” to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can’t quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

Community stats

  • 7.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.3K

    Posts

  • 70K

    Comments

Community moderators