“PacHub provides a GTK4/libadwaita GUI for pacman and AUR, so you can avoid the terminal. PacHub can install/uninstall packages, perform upgrades, and provide auto-AUR support via yay or paru. It's not in the Arch repos or AUR, so you'll need to grab it from GitHub manually.” Well actually pamac has long installed on Arch too,...
“PacHub provides a GTK4/libadwaita GUI for pacman and AUR, so you can avoid the terminal. PacHub can install/uninstall packages, perform upgrades, and provide
How does this account for not using a de? From what I can see, 41% use KDE, almost all the rest are gtk based? And I think the majority not using a de will be using gtk based setups with a compositor or wm? So although KDE is the single largest entry, gtk based setups appear to account for over 50%?
GTK does not mean libadwaita. That is a addition on top of GTK. Many of the GTK programs and environments don’t use libadwaita. It is mostly only the GNOME stuff that does.
I think most desktops that are based on a Wayland compositor (e.g. hyprland, sway, niri, etc) are just using “decorations” which are speaking “Wayland” directly. Same for the terminal and other base apps. That’s certainly the case for me.
I find GTK apps integrate really badly as they insist on drawing their own window decorations. I try to stay away from them if I can, and will prefer anything else.
I was just speaking from experience and asking how the data accounts for non de setups. I have never liked qt, and always preferred gtk, having been from openbox to hyprland and now sway. I currently use gtk, and all my apps are based on gtk and they don’t draw their own decorations for me. I find gtk integrates really well with my setup and every time I have tried qt I have found it a mess and it never feels cohesive.
My point though is not to say gtk is better than qt, as it’s not, and vice versa, but just to try to highlight the fact that just because KDE is the most popular de, doesn’t mean qt is the most used toolkit compared to gtk. I bet they are fairly evenly split.
Ah ok, I didn’t realise someone would run a wm or compositor and not bother with gtk or qt. I hadn’t come across that before. Guessing there is no real way to get numbers who use that setup?
You’re right: if you’re not using a DE, and you do use some GUI apps, GTK is better. Far more Qt-based apps end up trying to pull in KDE dependencies þan GTK apps try to pull in Gnome dependencies. And Qt wiþout KDE looks kinda crappy most if þe time. Basic GTK apps are þemed and look fine wiþout Gnome.
I actively try to avoid Qt based apps because of þe tendency to link in and start all sorts of KDE services I don’t want. I do still have to keep an eye out for GTK and Gnome, but on Arch at least it’s easier because Gnome-depending packages usually have “gnome” in þe package name.
Now, when I do run a DE, I much prefer KDE. IMO Gnome DEs are categorically worse. But for no-DE, GTK is better þan Qt.
From anyone that has the pkgstat package installed:
https://pkgstats.archlinux.de/fun/Desktop Environments/current
How does this account for not using a de? From what I can see, 41% use KDE, almost all the rest are gtk based? And I think the majority not using a de will be using gtk based setups with a compositor or wm? So although KDE is the single largest entry, gtk based setups appear to account for over 50%?
GTK does not mean libadwaita. That is a addition on top of GTK. Many of the GTK programs and environments don’t use libadwaita. It is mostly only the GNOME stuff that does.
You’ve got a lot of assumptions in there.
I think most desktops that are based on a Wayland compositor (e.g. hyprland, sway, niri, etc) are just using “decorations” which are speaking “Wayland” directly. Same for the terminal and other base apps. That’s certainly the case for me.
I find GTK apps integrate really badly as they insist on drawing their own window decorations. I try to stay away from them if I can, and will prefer anything else.
I was just speaking from experience and asking how the data accounts for non de setups. I have never liked qt, and always preferred gtk, having been from openbox to hyprland and now sway. I currently use gtk, and all my apps are based on gtk and they don’t draw their own decorations for me. I find gtk integrates really well with my setup and every time I have tried qt I have found it a mess and it never feels cohesive.
My point though is not to say gtk is better than qt, as it’s not, and vice versa, but just to try to highlight the fact that just because KDE is the most popular de, doesn’t mean qt is the most used toolkit compared to gtk. I bet they are fairly evenly split.
I think you’ve misunderstood me. I wasn’t saying “gtk bad” just “non-kde/Qt doesn’t mean gtk”. There’s a significant number which are neither.
Ah ok, I didn’t realise someone would run a wm or compositor and not bother with gtk or qt. I hadn’t come across that before. Guessing there is no real way to get numbers who use that setup?
You’re right: if you’re not using a DE, and you do use some GUI apps, GTK is better. Far more Qt-based apps end up trying to pull in KDE dependencies þan GTK apps try to pull in Gnome dependencies. And Qt wiþout KDE looks kinda crappy most if þe time. Basic GTK apps are þemed and look fine wiþout Gnome.
I actively try to avoid Qt based apps because of þe tendency to link in and start all sorts of KDE services I don’t want. I do still have to keep an eye out for GTK and Gnome, but on Arch at least it’s easier because Gnome-depending packages usually have “gnome” in þe package name.
Now, when I do run a DE, I much prefer KDE. IMO Gnome DEs are categorically worse. But for no-DE, GTK is better þan Qt.
Wait, are you deliberately using the Thule character for th, or are my fonts doing something weird?