- Arch-general - lists.archlinux.org

vim-9.2.0437 -- inserts 'PP' at start of every new file, downgrading to vim-9.2.0388 resolves the issue
by David C Rankin 06 May '26

06 May '26

Arch Devs, vim-9.2.0437 for some reason includes `PP` at the top of each new file it creates, e.g. $ vim foo This just started with this version update. Downgrading to vim-9.2.0388 (and vim-runtime-9.2.0388) resolves the issue. Does this need a bug? -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

4 14

ALARM: Archlinux for ARM
by Pocket 04 May '26

04 May '26

I have just about completed my project of building Archlinux for the raspberry pi 4 and 5 I have gotten to the point where I can run LXQT as the desktop. It works quite well and is much faster than ArchlinuxArm install as I have compiled all the packages with these CFLAGS: CFLAGS='-mcpu=cortex-a72 -O2 -pipe -ftree-vectorize -fomit-frame-pointer' CXXFLAGS="-Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS" LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1 -Wl,--sort-common -Wl,--as-needed -Wl,-z,relro -Wl,-z,now \ -Wl,-z,pack-relative-relocs" LTOFLAGS="" I have the following packages that fail to build that I could use some help with argyllcms fbida icmake libtpms mupdf sequoia-sq If someone here on the list has successfully built these on the arm platform it would most appreciated if they could pass me their changes from the x86_64 PKGBUILD and patches if required. After I do some general cleanup of my PKGBUILDs I am thinking that I will make them available on codeberg. -- Hindi madali ang maging ako

7 10

What caused Firefox 151 to change from Dark to Light theme when set to Auto?
by David C Rankin 03 May '26

03 May '26

All, On first start of Firefox 151, the general theme (tab bar, url bar, etc..) change from Dark to Light theme color. The setting for theme in Firefox was set to Auto, as it had always been. To restore the dark theme, I had to affirmatively select the Dark theme in settings. The desktop is fluxbox. Firefox has always presented a dark theme there. No changes were made to the desktop or desktop theme. Does anyone know why Firefox would suddenly switch from using Dark to Light theme with the setting for theme in Firefox set to Auto? Is it the xdg-desktop-portal package? E.g., Required By : xdg-desktop-portal-gtk Optional For : firefox As a test I tried removing xdg-desktop-portal, but it fails dependency checks now: checking dependencies... error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies) :: removing xdg-desktop-portal breaks dependency 'xdg-desktop-portal' required by xdg-desktop-portal-gtk As of 4/20/2026, I had no xdg-desktop-portal on my system as I was comparing openSUSE and Arch checking an GDBus.Error:org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.InvalidArgs bug thrown by python/matplotlib on openSUSE. See: https://lists.opensuse.org/archives/list/users@lists.opensuse.org/thread/6H… So is the requirement for xdg-desktop-portal install new on Arch, and was it intended as a hard dependency on all desktops, even the old ones like fluxbox? If so, was this what changed the Firefox theme from Dark to Light with Auto set? I have no need for xdg-desktop-portal, and don't really want it. If it's the problem, it's inclusion as a hard dependency seems contrary to the KISS philosophy of Arch? What say the experts? -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

2 1

Pacman and NPM conflict
by Sudarshan Srivatsan 28 Apr '26

28 Apr '26

Hello everyone, I had installed extra/zed recently, and it depends on npm and Node.js. Every time npm is updated in the repositories, there are always file conflicts. For now, I have been appending '--overwrite="*"', but I know that is not best practice. I also know that Zed pulls other packages directly via npm. Is there any way to prevent this, or is Zed/npm the issue, and nothing can be done except a request upstream? Sudarshan

2 1

Re: (optional) AUR helper in archinstall
by Óscar García Amor 25 Apr '26

25 Apr '26

Please forgive me for playing devil's advocate here, but I see that many of you are strongly opposed to adding an AUR helper to archinstall because “AUR packages shouldn't be in official repositories,” and yet we have aurpublish [1] in the extra repository. In my opinion, having some AUR helpers maintained as extra packages (such as paru or yay, which are the most widely used) is just like any other package maintained in the extra repository, and having them there would certainly make life easier for many users, since they wouldn’t face the chicken-and-egg problem when they start using AUR. I think a simple notice stating that this is no longer supported and that you use it at your own risk is sufficient. Ultimately, it’s about making life easier for the user. Greetings. [1]: https://archlinux.org/packages/extra/any/aurpublish/ -- Óscar García Amor | ogarcia at moire.org | http://ogarcia.me

15 32

python-dbus-deviation failure to build
by Pocket 25 Apr '26

25 Apr '26

I am trying to build python-dbus-deviation It fails and this is from the build log, and it appers to have not gotten to the check() function * Getting build dependencies for wheel... <string>:59: SetuptoolsDeprecationWarning: The test command is disabled and references to it are deprecated. !! ******************************************************************************** Please remove any references to `setuptools.command.test` in all supported versions of the affected package. This deprecation is overdue, please update your project and remove deprecated calls to avoid build errors in the future. ******************************************************************************** !! ERROR Missing dependencies: sphinx roman-numerals>=1.0.0 ==> ERROR: A failure occurred in build(). Aborting... ERROR Missing dependencies: sphinx I am building in a clean chroot as per the wiki on that subject I am using the PKGBUILD file from the git packaging repos all the depends and makedepends are installed into the chroot Can someone help me debug this and get to the bottom of this? -- Hindi madali ang maging ako

4 10

Re: (optional) AUR helper in archinstall
by Sudarshan Srivatsan 24 Apr '26

24 Apr '26

I feel the only justification for including an AUR helper in Archinstall would be for legacy drivers. But even then, there are other ways to accomplish this. Sudarshan

1 0

Re: (optional) AUR helper in archinstall
by Jonathan Isom 24 Apr '26

24 Apr '26

On Fri, Apr 24, 2026 at 5:00 AM Andrei Korshikov < andrej.s.korshikov(a)gmail.com> wrote: > "No" (for non-technical reason): > For me it looks like an encouragement or even invitation to use AUR > directly, which -- in an ideal world -- should be avoided (see > kpcyrd's letter above). > > "Yes" (for non-technical reason): > Newcomers will use AUR anyway, so it's a good opportunity to educate them > a bit. > > > users not aware of the risks, should be clearly informed of the "dangers" > > For me "cleary informed" means not just using general non-informative > waringns "not officially supported" and "use at your own risk", but > some explanations like in the mentioned kpcyrd's letter. I.e. users > should be aware of all that .so dependency business and Python > troubles, and understand that they do not use Arch Linux anymore, but > some kind of their own "Arch Linux downstream" distribution. > > Importance of paru's "localrepo" and "chroot" features (and similar > features in other helpers if/when they will be added to archinstall) > should be explained too. > > "I don't care": > I customize ISO (because I need ZFS kernel modules up and running), so > I already have AUR helper on it just in case:) And it is not really > needed anyway, because I use local repository (at least, for packages > which are important for me) to avoid troubles with dependencies. > > --- > Andrei > Regarding the staff discussion of “(optional) AUR helper in archinstall” For the NOs, would the aurutils scripts package be more of a yes? It only does fetching, searching and a few other tasks. The user would still have to fetch a package, makepkg it and install it. I have a wifi card that currently isn’t upstream in the kernel, but hopefully will in kernel 7.1 or 7.2. This would save quite a bit of searching and typing to install drivers that may still be not upstreamed, but available and still have an increased difficulty level compared to something like yay or paru. This could be a patched version that has a notice at the end of all actions that says something to the extent of “Arch User Repository is unsupported ArchLinux and its use can result in broken updates and systems. It is only included for the use of drivers that are not upstreamed yet. Use at ones own risk”. Maybe in red. Thanks J

1 0

Request: move AUR package "ruffle-nightly-bin" to official "extra" repository
by EpicTux123 24 Apr '26

24 Apr '26

The package https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ruffle-nightly-bin seems to be officially maintained ("ruffle" account), and it has also been in a good shape since many months now. Ruffle is an Adobe Flash Player emulator. Since the death of Adobe Flash Player, it has been the best way to run old Shockwave Flash (SWF) files. Website: https://ruffle.rs/ Repository: https://github.com/ruffle-rs/ruffle Build instructions: https://github.com/ruffle-rs/ruffle#building-from-source I'd like to ask for this package to become an official package on Arch Linux, because it is cool. :) I've also CC'd the maintainers of the AUR package in this e-mail. Thanks. -EpicTux123

1 0

Issues booting after kernel upgrades
by Lucie Scarlet 23 Apr '26

23 Apr '26

Hi, Whenever I upgrade my Linux kernel, my computer never properly boots. I have to boot into archiso and reinstall the kernel in chroot before I can get it booting again. Not very sure where to begin looking, but it's an issue that has been bugging me for a good while now. The fix for it is easy enough which is why I've put off mentioning it before now. Does anyone have tips for how to potentially fix this? /Lucie

11 18