“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
“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
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.
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.