What to do when AUR package blocks an update

If an update breaks backward compatibility with the AUR, that absolutely is an issue for testing regardless of where the fault lies. The AUR (and compatibility with it) is one of the main selling points of manjaro. The lack of backward compatibility and software breakage is one of the biggest problems for linux. If an update went to stable and left all of the AUR unusable, it would not be helpful to say that's "your responsibility," it would be Manjaro's problem. @zany130's comment was absolutely on-topic and being told "you deal with it" is unwelcoming and rude.

I read on a few places on the internet about how unwelcoming and toxic the manjaro forums have become and it seems they're not wrong.

@antikythera I was not discussing what "should and should not be prioritised by manjaro," I was saying that software breakage is on-topic for testing. At this point I don't care if I get banned for being off-topic, they'd be doing me a favour.

1 Like

You read from spastics about how we reply to spastics and you find that an issue and insulting? Maybe check some facts around when you make calmes like this:

How would Manjaro test for all AUR packages and make sure the update do not break the AUR package functionality? Have you ever tried to pull that out on Arch forum? Have you read the wiki on Manjaro about AUR, at least the red highlighted part of it if not all?
Now please do. There will be no special announcement to repeat that over and over again, or for each member in special messages ...

Yes, some updates can create problems. That is why we have unstable, testing and stable, but we don't deal with AUR packages. Issues that might come from upstream are enough to deal with, and there where times when a patch/fix was provided in minutes by Manjaro team before anybody else. If you want to help, then run the updates in a VBox install and report the issues you find for the packages within repository.

Did you, ever ? I doubt it !


Where did you get that from?? Manjaro homepage dont even mention AUR. You should've read AUR homepage that says:

DISCLAIMER: AUR packages are user produced content. Any use of the provided files is at your own risk.

Don't blame others of your own mistakes and misinformation. I recommend you read: AUR User Guidelines

People say that same crap about the Arch community, and they're so wrong.

1 Like

sorry i was just answering the poll and posting my experince now i know for the future you guys only what feedback from non aur issues. like I said in my post i was able to fix it and the poll was asking if you had a problem (which i did) and if you found a solution to post it(i did) maybe the poll should be corrected to say if you had a problem with a NON aur package then post it otherwise we don't care and will bash on you

1 Like

If you can't make the difference between correction of a statement and bashing, then that too is your problem.

Get yourself educated about that trolling "sorry" comment:

There is a particular category in the forum called #technical-issues-and-assistance:aur where we do deal with AUR packages and we do offer technical assistance. So, WE DO CARE, but it seems you not only display here a lack of appreciation, lack of common sense, but also lack of manners. You project your ignorance onto others and is sad even to see that you have one fan encouraging you.

@Jimbob and @zany130, this is the generic tactic if an AUR package blocks an update:

Uninstall the blocking AUR package, update the system and then build the AUR package anew.
How to do that? cd to the folder with the AUR package, edit PKGBUILD and increase the version number, run makepkg -sri.

If you don't know that, complaining about being treated badly doesn't make much sense.

It seems everyone is misunderstanding I never needed or wanted help with my aur issue. I was just providing feedback like the first post asked me to. So let me ask you. If I write a program and then ask you to give me feedback on any potential issue you may of had so you report that program a prevented you from using the program but you where able to solve this by removing said program. I then and several other onlookers start going on a huge rant about how program a is not supported and start @eugen-b the person several times trying to educate them that they shouldn't be asking for help if they're using said program. At several points you the person who posted this start receiving more @ saying that you are wrong for apologizing for creating this whole mess when all you wanted to do was what was asked of you.

I know the aur is not supported and any issues that arise from that are my own problem. Further more I know despite the aur not being supported there are specific threads for them. Also since the aur is not supported asking for help on aur issue that happens with the testing updates are of topic. However I wanted to report for Anyone that was using the same setup as me that this happened and what I did to solve it like I was asked

And yet I get laugh at and rediculed at several points. And then when I voice my concerns I'm told that it doesn't make sense. What doesn't make sense it's how everyone including a member of the team don't see anything wrong with this behavior. This is exactly the toxic behavior we as a Linux community need to avoid we need help people not criticize them for posting there issue about unsupported software and the solution to it

I think those who shout "AUR unsupported" should at least remember why. If they can't explain it, maybe no need to assert.

And those who expect AUR packages to always work without manual intervention just need a year more of Manjaro experience.

PS: I left the report about ffmpeg-compat-57 in the update topic for reference of other users as a kind of known issue. But it won't mean that Philip would do anything about it to fix it. He can't, because he doesn't compile your AUR packages.
But the solution - uninstall AUR package, update, rebuild the AUR package - works for practically all AUR packages which get compiled from source.

Yes I agree with your point. The aur is a user maintained repo so by it's very nature it can't be guaranteed that it won't break something. Also sometimes aur package will go out of date or no longer be maintained anymore. I am in agreement with everyone on that. My issue is that every one assumed because I posted my issue I didn't understand this and had to educate me. I guess I'm partialy at fault here to as the post wasn't asking if I had issues with the aur. It like if you backed this new bread and asked me to try it in a sandwich and I made a ice cream sandwich and reported on there sloppyness off this combo. I never was asked about that and it's kinda ridiculous to make that combo. Yet it's not really fair to assume that I expected that to be a supported combo.

Basically my report was objectively unnecessary but at the same time I was asked to make a report so you can't really criticize me. and it would be wrong to assume that I didn't know how the aur works or why it not supported based solely on the report

Yeah, you wrote "but fixed it by removing it". It didn't sound like you understood what you were doing. If you wrote "but as usually fixed it by removing and recompiling against the new lib x265" there would have been less misunderstanding.

1 Like

I agree and I learned that the more you say (or sometimes the little you say) has an effect. So I apologize while I it not correct everyone assumed this of me I really shouldn't get mad either as 1 brought it upon my self for mentioning a aur issue and not even really clarifying that I understood the issue or that it wasn't even relevant

1 Like

The perfect way to report would have been to create a new topic in the AUR category where you would have linked the update which caused it.

The second best way would have been if someone flagged your post in the Testing Update topic and a moderator would have moved it to the AUR category.

The worst solution would be to start an argument with 10+ posts about who is right and who is toxic and a moderator need then to find and move all 10+ posts - hehe. :wink:

I think we quite clarified how things are about AUR, regardless of your intention, so we did not misunderstood. Why are you indirectly call us ignoramus now?

Projection and playing the victime card. You laughed and you facepalm to the replies you received, and all the replies where strictly technical. You did that from the start, don't acuse others for what you do.

We let the wiki to "explain" it, so we did not assert anything off topic, nor we are under the ignorance influence.

The same as there is no half pregnant, there is no partially faulty. Either you are, or not. Whatever your initial intention was, and mistake you did, nobody blamed you. @Yochanan and i posted explanations, more or less longer or clear, strictly in reference to Manjaro AUR update/reasonability relationship. Even @Elanzer made an intent to explain the same technicality details ... that you dismiss and facepalm and ridiculed, then falsely accused Manjaro for not caring. That escalated the discussion. Now you try to imply that our reaction was exaggerated just for you trying innocently to report an issue ... No, no, no - Your doublespeak will not pass.

Do i see an appeal to format fallacy here? Also, do you know the stories about heroes after the battle? I'm sure you do, but wile all this might be nice and dandy, seeing that you managed to agree with our friend here, that is trying to pull a story shift, like a weasel (that would be a name calling), for me at least is quite disappointing. And with all the respect and my strange sense of humor, i find your last statement unhumorous.

You definitely not.

I agree with you, but I didn't want to tell it all in his face, because there is little educational value in it.

But my appeal at you too, instead of joining an argument in an update topic, just flag the post, it will be moved and then you and others can try to convince mistaken poster in a dedicated topic.

You see, that could mean: either that i did not let the wiki explain it, then i would have to ask: What is this exactly? in regard with this comment of mine:

or it could mean that i'm not ignorant :slight_smile:
Should i interpret it the "wrong" way :stuck_out_tongue: ?

The initial post was not something to flag as was not against any of the forum rules, and the correction made by @Yochanan was perfectly legit, short and to the subject, and any rational person would have just take it as it was, but someone felt like arguing more with another opposing statement that was somehow formulated different, pushing the rhetoric a bit. So, i tried my best to explain it again.
After that was too late for flagging because we received not only strawman arguments, facepalms on our comments, but also been accused of not caring about. At such point i will not wait for any admin or moderator to take time for the issue. Is a community issue, so anybody belonging to the community should be able to defend it. If that is not the case, then maybe is time to call it something else ... :wink:

Of course, you should. :wink:

It can be flagged as off-topic. This is my position, when people post off-topic in update announcements, kick their ass politely. But it is just a recommendation.
You are of coursefree to start trying to argue with them, but I'm free to be unamused that I need to move more posts to a separate topic.

Anyway, I don't have any hope that anybody changes in any way.

I'll stay away from the forum, so nobody will imply i'm the one that has to change.
Have a good one!

Forum kindly sponsored by