Open SvenMeyer opened 1 year ago
I just did a refresh of the software database using the Manjaro GUI and it came back with an error message when reaching ungoogled_chromium.
However, when I used the CLI it looks like to work. Shouldn't both outcomes be the same ?
$ sudo pacman -Syy
[sudo] password for sum:
:: Synchronizing package databases...
core 141.1 KiB 165 KiB/s 00:01 [##############################] 100%
extra 1640.4 KiB 2015 KiB/s 00:01 [##############################] 100%
community 6.8 MiB 5.31 MiB/s 00:01 [##############################] 100%
multilib 145.2 KiB 648 KiB/s 00:00 [##############################] 100%
home_ungoogled_chromiu... 1400.0 B 1395 B/s 00:01 [##############################] 100%
If there anything wrong with specifying the repo in /etc/pacman.conf
?
[home_ungoogled_chromium_Arch]
SigLevel = Required TrustAll
Server = https://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/ungoogled_chromium/Arch/$arch
I think the OBS changes keys every time all packages in a repository finish building.
@jstkdng Does that make sense? Is that a "normal" process ? Maybe just better use your repo ? ;-)
Does that make sense? Is that a "normal" process ?
perhaps it does to the OBS folks, not to me. I had to disable Signature Checking whenever I needed to downgrade.
Maybe just better use your repo ? ;-)
My repo also uses the OBS m8. I'd recommend you to move from manjaro to regular arch or an arch distro that doesn't hold package upgrades.
@jstkdng
I'd recommend you to move from manjaro to regular arch or an arch distro that doesn't hold package upgrades.
What would be your recommendation if I want a stable system just as a "user" ?
As I have problems with the 113 version on Manjaro, see #227 , I wanted to downgrade using the previous version from the cache, however this gives me an error. Actually it works with none of the packages which I installed previously without problems.
However, I just remember when I install an update (using the GUI updater) it always downloads
ungoogled-chromium
twice ... strange.Is there something wrong with the PGP signature ?