I’ve considered doing this because Shelly supports -noconfirm and I can pin Shelly’s widget just like Cachy-Update.
Shelly supports -noconfirm
AC/DC running in the background: I’m on a Hiiiiiiiiiighway to Hell!! Duh-duh!!
Behind the Scene
some aur packages installed, and that package is hijacked to install malware ~~
anyway, it’s unwise to do that, from my opinion…
if you’re just lazy to check all the update, and want to avoid catasthrophic failure, better avoid rolling distro..
I just press jjyy00 every time, so it wouldn’t make a difference.
If anything wrong happens, I just reinstall CachyOS and it’s like nothing ever happened.
People who spent hours to configure their System with Love won’t like your point of view…
Do they love it enough to write a txt file with every changed setting just in case?
Whisper;
Case in point MYSELF. Think he might want to go back to WinBLOWS.
Just curious, what do you consider drawbacks in this case?
Not being able to remove ophan packages, for example. I haven’t seen Shelly doing that.
But to answer the question underneath; in case of inevitable bricking, I prefer to have that within a two months period between reinstallations. And using noconfirm on Arch Linux for a year until I migrated to CachyOS never broke my system.
So having to reinstall in a few months is a good price to pay for using noconfirm.
That’s nice.
Hold on, I’m just adjusting my package to include a keylogger fix for CachyOS users. You won’t even know it’s there.
Now I know not ALL CachyOS users are stupid enough to never look at the PKGBuild, so I’ll wait until the third update to pass you the update.
Let me know if it’s not completely invisible.
BRB - I’ll get it in the AUR and you can test it out for me 
Look at the pattern - huge, frequent releases, rapid fire-fighting bug fixes. They are releasing beta software to the release channel and letting users do the unit testing.
Given its purpose, that’s not good enough. Plus, the frequency and volume of changes suggests someone is letting the LLMs loose. The bugs suggest a lack of quality control.
I’m posting this because yesterday I fired up Shelly, it locked up two processes at 100% CPU. I closed Shelly and the processes remained - I had to End Process on them. I then discovered many corrupted directories in my package cache.
My advice? Learn the handful of terminal commands you need or install Octopi.
Yes, I feel (my opinion) the decision to shift to Shelly as a distro std is very premature. But hey, no one asked me lol.
That’s amazing!
No one asked me either.
But its a familiar discomforting feeling being on the other end of my Distro’s latest flavor of ‘alternative-to-and-not-a-frontend-for-pacman-GUI’.
Le sigh. 
I just installed Octopi after removing Shelly. Octopi UI / UX is much cleaner, quicker, more intuitive.
If this were a democracy (!) I’d vote for the return of Octopi. The fans of Russian Roulette can install Shelly if they want to!
So, my recommend is Cachy-Update in the tray, Octopi for when you want GUI, and yay for all the other stuff.
Octopi has always been the only thing worrth recommending because its exactly what pamac and shelly are not - a frontend for the official package manager pacman.
And more sprinkled about.
While those quotes are all from before shelly existed nothing has caused me to fundamentally change any of those positions.
And still thats just for the GUI folks.
pacman (and paru if you need an AUR helper) are mighty fine on their own. 
Given that yay wraps both of those, is it not the best of both worlds? Any reason to not use yay in your experience?
No .. yay does not wrap paru.
It is like the same thing as paru .. in fact paru is from one of the previous yay devs.
( Just slightly different and written in Rust [ vs Go from yay] )
Both are AUR-helpers that are also pacman-wrappers.
( And Octopi can use both as a ‘backend’ .. along with trizen,pikaur,pacaur. )