So I recently installed Cachyos and I am now met with this problem.

There are kind of 2 main contenders here and I’m split between them. What do you use?

There is pacman + aur and then there is flatpak. Pacman has deep system integration and is much more lightweight but it has deep system integration and requires sudo to install. flatpak has sandboxing and easy permission management but it’s bloated and possibly less performant?

Of course if the package isn’t available on flathub then I will have to use the aur but when both are available it’s hard to decide.

  • woodsb02@lemmy.ml
    1·
    4 months ago

    For command line apps, I use paru for AUR. For desktop apps, if they’re available as a flatpak, I prefer that for the increased security provided by the sandbox. Otherwise I use Arch packages or AUR. I even uninstall GNOME apps (calendar, weather) from pacman, and install their flatpaks.

  • communism@lemmy.ml
    1·
    4 months ago

    Yay

    I only use flatpak for one Python program because it has a lot of runtime dependencies I don’t want to bother with. I generally wouldn’t use flatpak.

  • mub@lemmy.ml
    1·
    4 months ago

    pacman / yay

    I also like pacseek as it provides a simple tui for package search and getting info about packages.

  • thingsiplay@lemmy.ml
    1·
    4 months ago

    I use yay, as it comes by default with EndeavourOS. It’s basically an AUR helper that uses pacman and works quite the same.

    Flatpak is a different package manager and has nothing to do with your system packages. They are not exclusive, I use both. So what you basically asking isn’t which package manager people use, but rather which package format.

  • TruePe4rl@lemmy.mlEnglish
    1·
    4 months ago

    pacman + yay + appman (in cases where appimage is more convenient)

    If you need something from AUR, Chaotic AUR builds some of them.

    Technically I also use managers for certain languages and environments, so sometimes cargo, pip, luarocks, … whatever.

    I did try to use flatpak in the past, but I just found it annoying. If you do not explicitly need it’s capabilities for a certain app it is mostly makes accessing app’s config and data a major annoyance imo.

  • DefinitelyNotBirds@lemmy.ml
    0·
    4 months ago

    Pacman plus the AUR is the move on Arch based distros. The AUR gives you access to basically everything, and paru or yay handles the build chain without pain. Flatpak has its place for apps that ship messy runtime dependencies, but for most things it adds an unnecessary isolation layer. Have you tried paru as your AUR helper yet?

    • pineapple@lemmy.mlOPEnglish
      1·
      4 months ago

      I haven’t actually installed an aur helper yet but when I end up needing one, I think I will go with paru.

    • thingsiplay@lemmy.ml
      1·
      4 months ago

      I sometimes prefer Flatpak over AUR, because I do not trust everyone on the AUR to run scripts with root rights on my system. At least Flatpaks are a bit sandboxed (even if the sandbox is an illusion) and the programs don’t install and run with root rights. Sometimes the Flatpak is from the original developer and the script in AUR is not. Or the AUR script is not updated well and often enough, unlike day one Flatpak updates. But Flatpaks do not integrate well in your system and applications can look out of place too. There is a lot to consider, besides what you already mentioned.

      I use both, prefer the AUR in optimal cases.