A new testing repo + iso


#1

An new testing/unstable repo


So you may or may not have noticed al packages haven’t had an update in a while, this is because for the last while I’ve been using an unstable/testing repo to test out changes to packages.

Going forward packages will first sit here for a while to be tested before being released on the stable (existing) repo. The goal of this is to have the testing repo maintain the same level of quality and pre-upload testing as the main repo had, but after the initial startup, the main repo will become more stable as a result.

Those looking to add it and hop on the beta bus to help test can add the following lines to /etc/pacman.conf

[archlabs_unstable]
Server = https://bitbucket.org/archlabslinux/$repo/raw/master/$arch

[archlabs_repo]
Server = https://bitbucket.org/archlabslinux/$repo/raw/master/$arch
Server = https://sourceforge.net/projects/archlabs-repo/files/$repo/$arch
Server = https://github.com/ARCHLabs/$repo/raw/master/$arch

Adding it above [archlabs_repo] (as shown above) will have unstable take priority, adding below, and the stable repo takes priority, regardless of where it is same name packages of greater version will be grabbed from whichever repo has the latest version, however both can always be installed with pacman -S repo/package_name

Testing ISO


Along with this we have a new testing iso for those interested, this has the testing repo enabled by default
https://drive.google.com/open?id=16GI7y7Vu3X8sR5JKznba3nyUhhS6oJkt

Package changes


  • st is now packaged and is the default terminal
  • pacli, yaourt, and downgrade are gone in favor of aurman
  • archlabs-installer has had another round of changes/improvements/bug fixes
  • archlabs-user-skel now has moderate default configs for ranger and vim
  • jgmenu has been updated to 1.0

As always, free to voice any questions/concerns

Cheers


2018.07 Testing Release
Yaourt is Dead!
Want to try a new terminal
Help with switching to Unstable + adding the Testing repo's?
Update trouble: signature from user is invalid error, failed to commit transaction conflicting files error
#2

Just a note, most of you won’t see that there is a category for reporting issues. You need to be at user level 4 in the forum to view and add to this category.

If you wish to participate in the testing, let me know and I will add you to the required level :smiley:

Please, only add this repo if you intend to report issues and offer feedback.


#3

Great stuff guys. But why the change from pacli?


#4

We are done with Yaourt. Its not as secure as other options. Aurman is the best option in our opinion as it works just like Pacman. You use the same commands as Pacman, you just replace “pacman” with “aurman”

For example, to search packages:

aurman -Ss <package-name>.

Best change for me is st as default terminal.


#5

Good to know. Cheers.

Never tried st.


#6

You’ll be able to soon and you won’t need to bother compiling it to do it either. :smiley:


#7

Congrats on newer test iso team, keep it on.


#8

Is that the reason why last couple of days pacman (installed alongside with pacli) doesn’t open?
Unlikely…
It was just a curiosity, I am going to switch to the testing iso later this evening… :sunglasses:


#9

Which patches - if any - are applied to st these days? I’m assuming this is Nate’s custom version.


#10

@natemaia
We have a deadline for testing?
Example, after 30 days, the official stable launch will be made available?


If I am not mistaken, the right is for the user to inform some changes before customizing the system.
is it correct?


Any chance to test PacUI?


#11

I don’t think there will be a timeline as such. I’m thinking if people are testing and no issues are reported, Nate will push the update.

@pippo could have just been a pacman issue.

@PackRat not quite sure mate, probably Nates tweaks, @natemaia will have to let you know for sure here.


#12

Haha. I’m curious too. st is the best terminal but lacks some eyecandy out of the box. The main issue is the lack of opacity. I use a patched version of st that has all the bells and whistles and I must say it really is the best terminal you can think of.


#13

As far as timelines for packages it will depend on what the package is, there likely won’t be one and instead once it’s tested and has no issues it could be released within a day or two.

st only has minimal patches, scrollback and a color theme + toggle (Ctrl-Shift-t). I’m still not quite sure how I feel about prepacked binaries of suckless software as it’s kinda missing the point, however we’ll see.


#14

@natemaia @Dobbie03
I understand, thanks!


#15

Thank you very much for your time and great work


#16

st without transparency really is ugly, is it not? I love my st with transparency :wink:


#17

Hello @Dobbie03 and @natemaia, new to ArchLabs but not new to Linux. I’ve downloaded the testing .iso and have it installed on my laptop now. I’m happy to participate in continued testing and provide any feedback when necessary. :slightly_smiling_face:
And thanks @Dobbie03 for replying to my email and helping me with my forum account and access!


#18

@InJustOnePunch thanks for that, have updated you so you should be able to see the Testing Repo Feedback thread

https://forum.archlabslinux.com/c/technical-issues-assistance/Forum-for-Feedback-on-Testing

Cheers


#19

Did a clean install with the testing iso, no hitches during install. I used the welcome script to install printing support no problem.

One hitch, your openbox pipemenus are coded to use termite so they all failed when I tried to install gimp and a couple other programs.


#20

Is this a situation where “exo-preferred” would solve the issue?