You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Omarchy's install paths name packages that only exist for x86_64, and nothing in
the tree checks the running architecture, so on aarch64 the Install menu offers
entries that can never succeed. Each one fails in a floating terminal that prints error: target not found: <pkg> and closes, usually faster than it can be read.
bin/omarchy-pkg-add is pacman-only. It runs sudo pacman -S --noconfirm --needed "$@" and never touches the AUR
(bin/omarchy-pkg-aur-add is the separate yay path). Any name that is not in a
configured sync repository fails outright.
bin/omarchy-install-app hides the failure. It wraps omarchy-pkg-add in omarchy-launch-floating-terminal-with-presentation, so the pacman error appears
in a transient floating window and disappears. The same is true of every omarchy-launch-floating-terminal-with-presentation omarchy-install-* menu action.
Nothing anywhere checks the architecture. In 4.0.0.alpha, grep -rIn 'x86_64\|aarch64\|uname -m\|arm64\|HOSTTYPE\|MACHTYPE' bin default install config etc shell
returns no hits. The omarchy-hw-* predicate family covers CPU vendor, GPU,
chassis and peripherals, but has no architecture predicate, so no menu entry can
currently gate on one.
The [omarchy] repository compounds this. default/pacman/pacman-stable.conf points
it at https://pkgs.omarchy.org/stable/$arch, and that tree is x86_64-only:
Most of the AUR-derived apps in the Install menu resolve out of [omarchy] on x86_64
(1password, cursor-bin, dropbox, lmstudio-bin, once-bin, openai-codex-desktop, spotify, sublime-text-4, symfony-cli, visual-studio-code-bin, voxtype-bin, … — 202 packages in the x86_64 database), so
on aarch64 they have no source at all through the pacman-only path.
Reachable entries whose package cannot exist on aarch64
Every row below is offered from Menu → Install with no hardware or architecture
gate. Their only disabled predicate is omarchy-pkg-present <pkg>, which is false on
a machine where the package could never have installed — so the entry renders enabled. arch= values are from the authoritative PKGBUILD at https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/plain/PKGBUILD?h=<pkg>; "not in any repo" was
checked with pacman -Si against core/extra/alarm/aur.
Menu path
Command it runs
Package
Why it fails on aarch64
Install → AI → Ollama
omarchy-install-app Ollama ollama
ollama
AUR arch=('x86_64'); not in any aarch64 repo. Reproduced on this host — /var/log/pacman.log[2026-08-27T20:41:18+0300] [PACMAN] Running 'pacman -S --noconfirm --needed ollama', error: target not found: ollama. Ollama does publish ollama-linux-arm64.tar.zst upstream, so this is a packaging assumption rather than a support gap.
AUR arch=('x86_64') — fails in yay rather than pacman, but is equally unreachable
Reachable entries whose package could work on aarch64
These are a milder case of the same mechanism: the upstream PKGBUILD does list aarch64, but the package lives only in the AUR and in [omarchy], and omarchy-pkg-add is pacman-only while pkgs.omarchy.org has no aarch64 tree. So they
fail too, even though nothing about them is architecture-bound.
Menu path
Package
Upstream arch=
Install → AI → ChatGPT Desktop
openai-codex-desktop
('x86_64' 'aarch64')
Install → Editor → VSCode
visual-studio-code-bin
('x86_64' 'aarch64' 'armv7h')
Install → Editor → Sublime Text
sublime-text-4
('x86_64' 'aarch64')
Install → Service → ONCE
once-bin
('x86_64' 'aarch64')
Install → Service → NordVPN
nordvpn-bin
('x86_64' 'i686' 'armv7h' 'aarch64' 'armeabi')
What is not affected
For completeness, I traced every x86-only package name in bin/, install/ and default/ and confirmed the following are correctly gated behind an omarchy-hw-*
predicate or a hardware-detection guard, so they never run on ARM and are not part
of this report: intel-lpmd, thermald, intel-media-driver, libvpl, vpl-gpu-rt, libva-intel-driver, intel-ipu7-camera, linux-ptl, linux-ptl-headers, sof-firmware, asusctl, supergfxctl (when: omarchy-hw-hybrid-gpu), broadcom-wl, macbook12-spi-driver-dkms, dell-xps-touchpad-haptics, dell-xps13-sidecar-amps, qmk-hid, tuxedo-drivers-nocompatcheck-dkms, yt6801-dkms, linux-firmware-marvell, the nvidia.sh kernel/driver set, and the ollama-cuda / ollama-rocm branches of install.ai.ollama (guarded by omarchy-cmd-present nvidia-smi / rocminfo).
I also deliberately left the gaming entries (install.gaming.steam, .lutris, .heroic) out of the tables. They are ungated and they do fail
(steam is multilib-only, wine-staging is arch=('x86_64' 'i686'), heroic-games-launcher-bin is arch=('x86_64')), but the whole stack is x86-bound by
nature and arguably belongs to a different discussion.
One adjacent case I could not classify cleanly and am flagging as unverified: install.gaming.xbox-controllers runs omarchy-pkg-add linux-headers xpadneo-dkms. xpadneo-dkms is arch=(any), but linux-headers does not exist under that name on
ALARM (linux-aarch64-headers) or Asahi (linux-asahi-headers). That is a kernel
package-naming assumption rather than an architecture one, and several
hardware-gated scripts share it.
PR Guard three x86-only assumptions so Omarchy can install on aarch64 #8039 covers the aarch64 install-time path (mkinitcpiothunderbolt, [multilib] in pacman.conf, mise-work) and notes the pkgs.omarchy.org aarch64
gap as out of scope. This issue is about the post-install, user-facing menu.
I did not find an open report covering the general case.
Suggested direction
Offered as options, not a prescription:
A preflight in omarchy-pkg-add. Before shelling out to pacman, check that each
name resolves for the running architecture and, when it does not, fail with a
message that says so — instead of letting error: target not found scroll past in a
window that closes. This would cover every call site at once, including the ones
reached from scripts rather than the menu.
disabled predicates on the menu entries whose package cannot exist on the
running architecture, so the entry is greyed out rather than offered. PR Offer a source-build fallback when Voxtype's binary needs AVX2 #8316's bin/omarchy-hw-x86-64-v3 already returns false for any non-x86_64 machine
([[ $machine == "x86_64" ]] || exit 1 before the flag checks), so it could serve as
that gate directly, or a narrower omarchy-hw-x86-64 predicate could be split out of
it.
Publishing an aarch64 tree on pkgs.omarchy.org would independently fix the
second table, since those packages already build for ARM.
(1) and (2) are complementary: (2) keeps the dead entries out of the user's way, (1)
catches the script-level call sites and gives a readable error when a package is missing
for any other reason.
Happy to open a PR for whichever of these you'd prefer — the omarchy-hw-x86-64
predicate plus disabled gates is the smallest change, and the omarchy-pkg-add
preflight is the one that covers the most ground.
Summary
Omarchy's install paths name packages that only exist for
x86_64, and nothing inthe tree checks the running architecture, so on aarch64 the Install menu offers
entries that can never succeed. Each one fails in a floating terminal that prints
error: target not found: <pkg>and closes, usually faster than it can be read.System details
4.0.0.alpha(from/usr/share/omarchy/version)uname -m=aarch64, kernel7.2.0-2-aarch64-ARCH(not Asahi)product_name=QEMU Virtual Machine,/proc/device-tree/compatibleempty)core,extra,alarm,aurMechanism
Three pieces combine:
bin/omarchy-pkg-addis pacman-only. It runssudo pacman -S --noconfirm --needed "$@"and never touches the AUR(
bin/omarchy-pkg-aur-addis the separateyaypath). Any name that is not in aconfigured sync repository fails outright.
bin/omarchy-install-apphides the failure. It wrapsomarchy-pkg-addinomarchy-launch-floating-terminal-with-presentation, so the pacman error appearsin a transient floating window and disappears. The same is true of every
omarchy-launch-floating-terminal-with-presentation omarchy-install-*menu action.grep -rIn 'x86_64\|aarch64\|uname -m\|arm64\|HOSTTYPE\|MACHTYPE' bin default install config etc shellreturns no hits. The
omarchy-hw-*predicate family covers CPU vendor, GPU,chassis and peripherals, but has no architecture predicate, so no menu entry can
currently gate on one.
The
[omarchy]repository compounds this.default/pacman/pacman-stable.confpointsit at
https://pkgs.omarchy.org/stable/$arch, and that tree is x86_64-only:Most of the AUR-derived apps in the Install menu resolve out of
[omarchy]on x86_64(
1password,cursor-bin,dropbox,lmstudio-bin,once-bin,openai-codex-desktop,spotify,sublime-text-4,symfony-cli,visual-studio-code-bin,voxtype-bin, … — 202 packages in the x86_64 database), soon aarch64 they have no source at all through the pacman-only path.
Reachable entries whose package cannot exist on aarch64
Every row below is offered from Menu → Install with no hardware or architecture
gate. Their only
disabledpredicate isomarchy-pkg-present <pkg>, which is false ona machine where the package could never have installed — so the entry renders enabled.
arch=values are from the authoritative PKGBUILD athttps://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/plain/PKGBUILD?h=<pkg>; "not in any repo" waschecked with
pacman -Siagainstcore/extra/alarm/aur.omarchy-install-app Ollama ollamaollamaarch=('x86_64'); not in any aarch64 repo. Reproduced on this host —/var/log/pacman.log[2026-08-27T20:41:18+0300] [PACMAN] Running 'pacman -S --noconfirm --needed ollama',error: target not found: ollama. Ollama does publishollama-linux-arm64.tar.zstupstream, so this is a packaging assumption rather than a support gap.omarchy-install-app 'LM Studio' lmstudio-binlmstudio-binarch=('x86_64')omarchy-install-and-launch Cursor cursor-bin cursorcursor-binarch=('x86_64')omarchy-install-editor-zed→omarchy-pkg-add zed omazedzed,omazedzedinextra/alarm; AURzedisarch=('x86_64').omazedisarch=('any')but AUR-only, which the pacman-only path cannot reach.omarchy-install-service-1password→omarchy-pkg-add 1password 1password-cli1passwordarch=('x86_64')(1password-clidoes listaarch64)omarchy-install-service-spotify→omarchy-pkg-add spotifyspotifyarch=('x86_64')omarchy-install-service-dropbox→omarchy-pkg-add dropbox …dropbox,nautilus-dropboxarch=("x86_64")for bothomarchy-install-dev-env symfony→omarchy-pkg-add symfony-clisymfony-cliarch=('x86_64')omarchy-install-browser edge→omarchy-pkg-aur-add microsoft-edge-stable-binmicrosoft-edge-stable-binarch=('x86_64')— fails inyayrather than pacman, but is equally unreachableReachable entries whose package could work on aarch64
These are a milder case of the same mechanism: the upstream PKGBUILD does list
aarch64, but the package lives only in the AUR and in[omarchy], andomarchy-pkg-addis pacman-only whilepkgs.omarchy.orghas no aarch64 tree. So theyfail too, even though nothing about them is architecture-bound.
arch=openai-codex-desktop('x86_64' 'aarch64')visual-studio-code-bin('x86_64' 'aarch64' 'armv7h')sublime-text-4('x86_64' 'aarch64')once-bin('x86_64' 'aarch64')nordvpn-bin('x86_64' 'i686' 'armv7h' 'aarch64' 'armeabi')What is not affected
For completeness, I traced every x86-only package name in
bin/,install/anddefault/and confirmed the following are correctly gated behind anomarchy-hw-*predicate or a hardware-detection guard, so they never run on ARM and are not part
of this report:
intel-lpmd,thermald,intel-media-driver,libvpl,vpl-gpu-rt,libva-intel-driver,intel-ipu7-camera,linux-ptl,linux-ptl-headers,sof-firmware,asusctl,supergfxctl(when: omarchy-hw-hybrid-gpu),broadcom-wl,macbook12-spi-driver-dkms,dell-xps-touchpad-haptics,dell-xps13-sidecar-amps,qmk-hid,tuxedo-drivers-nocompatcheck-dkms,yt6801-dkms,linux-firmware-marvell, thenvidia.shkernel/driver set, and theollama-cuda/ollama-rocmbranches ofinstall.ai.ollama(guarded byomarchy-cmd-present nvidia-smi/rocminfo).I also deliberately left the gaming entries (
install.gaming.steam,.lutris,.heroic) out of the tables. They are ungated and they do fail(
steamis multilib-only,wine-stagingisarch=('x86_64' 'i686'),heroic-games-launcher-binisarch=('x86_64')), but the whole stack is x86-bound bynature and arguably belongs to a different discussion.
One adjacent case I could not classify cleanly and am flagging as unverified:
install.gaming.xbox-controllersrunsomarchy-pkg-add linux-headers xpadneo-dkms.xpadneo-dkmsisarch=(any), butlinux-headersdoes not exist under that name onALARM (
linux-aarch64-headers) or Asahi (linux-asahi-headers). That is a kernelpackage-naming assumption rather than an architecture one, and several
hardware-gated scripts share it.
How this differs from the existing reports
is the right shape for it — a source-build fallback gated on the new
omarchy-hw-x86-64-v3predicate. But that fix is local tobin/omarchy-voxtype-install; the same class of failure remains in every otherungated Install entry above.
x86_64.
mkinitcpiothunderbolt,[multilib]inpacman.conf,mise-work) and notes thepkgs.omarchy.orgaarch64gap as out of scope. This issue is about the post-install, user-facing menu.
I did not find an open report covering the general case.
Suggested direction
Offered as options, not a prescription:
omarchy-pkg-add. Before shelling out to pacman, check that eachname resolves for the running architecture and, when it does not, fail with a
message that says so — instead of letting
error: target not foundscroll past in awindow that closes. This would cover every call site at once, including the ones
reached from scripts rather than the menu.
disabledpredicates on the menu entries whose package cannot exist on therunning architecture, so the entry is greyed out rather than offered. PR Offer a source-build fallback when Voxtype's binary needs AVX2 #8316's
bin/omarchy-hw-x86-64-v3already returns false for any non-x86_64machine(
[[ $machine == "x86_64" ]] || exit 1before the flag checks), so it could serve asthat gate directly, or a narrower
omarchy-hw-x86-64predicate could be split out ofit.
pkgs.omarchy.orgwould independently fix thesecond table, since those packages already build for ARM.
(1) and (2) are complementary: (2) keeps the dead entries out of the user's way, (1)
catches the script-level call sites and gives a readable error when a package is missing
for any other reason.
Happy to open a PR for whichever of these you'd prefer — the
omarchy-hw-x86-64predicate plus
disabledgates is the smallest change, and theomarchy-pkg-addpreflight is the one that covers the most ground.