I hate them. The way APT handles dependencies is just plain frustrating, truly a dependency hell. I hate how extracting and installing packages has a 30% success rate and nothing seems to work correctly.
My favorites are PETget, Pacman, Portage, and just using plain old .tgz packages in something like Slackware.
Also, sorry if this is in the wrong subforum.
Do you like Debian and Debian based distros?
-
Woof Woof Brysche
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Wed 30 Dec 2009, 05:08
For me, debian is the way to go! I never have problems installing packages, and for the most part, everything just works. Yes, sometimes apt can be a pain with dependencies but it has prevented me more headaches than it has caused.
Have you ever tried aptitude? It may handle dependencies different.
As far as the debian variants I can't say much. I have used ubuntu for a while and I have mixed feelings about it. One one hand it sets itself up, looks cool, and its generally pretty stable. On the other, when things break its a pain to fix and it runs as slow as molasses (I may give xubuntu a try bc I think some of the problems may be gnome
).
IMO Debian is harder to set up but seems to have less junk and is more stable.
My $0.02
Have you ever tried aptitude? It may handle dependencies different.
As far as the debian variants I can't say much. I have used ubuntu for a while and I have mixed feelings about it. One one hand it sets itself up, looks cool, and its generally pretty stable. On the other, when things break its a pain to fix and it runs as slow as molasses (I may give xubuntu a try bc I think some of the problems may be gnome
). IMO Debian is harder to set up but seems to have less junk and is more stable.
My $0.02
Ubuntu and its derivatives are okay systems. The availability of packages is probably their strongest selling point as far as I'm concerned. Package selection and SMP support were the original reasons I started playing with Ubuntu instead of Puppy on my desktop. Both of those shortcomings have been rectified in recent versions of Puppy.
Recently I've been experimenting with Arch. I have to say that I agree with you about pacman. Based on what I've done the dependency handling is phenomenal.
Recently I've been experimenting with Arch. I have to say that I agree with you about pacman. Based on what I've done the dependency handling is phenomenal.
Be brave that God may help thee, speak the truth even if it leads to death, and safeguard the helpless. - A knight's oath
RE: Do you like Debian . . .
Yes, very much so. I've learned to start minimal, choose my packages wisely, use the Slackware philosophy of (mostly) one software pkg for one task, and have the goal of one day mastering the CLI. Learning apt-get and aptitude has been of great benefit and preferable to rpm pkgs for me. How? In conceptualizing the dependency isssue for an anticipated foray into the world of Slackware (necessitated, in part, by Ubuntu's Meerkat not supporting i686 machines in the near future). This journey has been made personally easier by Debian Distros like antiX and sidux and, in the beginning, SuperOS 9.10.
- Attachments
-
- Debian Cofee Wallpaper Linux Debian Morning Avatar.jpg
- It woke me to Linux!
- (18 KiB) Downloaded 1070 times
“[i]My fate cannot be mastered; it can only be collaborated with and thereby, to some extent, directed[/i].†-- Aldous Huxley, 1894-1963[i]
I like Debian because: It's stable. Apt is marvelous. I like the idea of security updates. I have a minimal install of Debian Lenny on my OLD desktop, which runs very well. Over the years it's had a new lock, a new stock, and a new barrel, but it's the same install- all my configurations and so on stay through all the changes.
On the other hand..... installed packages from the 25000-strong repositories don't always work.
I installed Ubuntu netbook edition on my netbook- it works ok, but it installs Grub to your MBR without asking, and the menu lists the Windows XP ok, but ignores Puppy completely. So I re-installed Fluppy, but no matter what I do to the Grub menu file I can't boot Ubuntu. I can do without it...
While I had Ubuntu, I tried to install Flite (the voice-from-text app that's in Fluppy), it went through the motions- download, install, etc, but would it run? No.
One problem with having Grub under the control of Puppy, is that Debian and Ubuntu put the full kernel version number in the menu, and when an update installs a later kernel version the Ubuntu Grub menu gets updated to match. With Grub in Puppy, the menu will then be pointing to an old kernel version, which may still be present or may not.
On my desktop, I have Debian installed and run Puppy from live cd. This has the advantage that I can have umpteen save files, one with GIMP, one with something else big, one basic. Choose which one I want at boot, and don't slow things down when I don't need to.
One thing about the very user-friendly distros is that they make getting under the bonnet (hood) difficult. It's so easy to get into Puppy to tweak the carb settings (so to speak).
gerry
On the other hand..... installed packages from the 25000-strong repositories don't always work.
I installed Ubuntu netbook edition on my netbook- it works ok, but it installs Grub to your MBR without asking, and the menu lists the Windows XP ok, but ignores Puppy completely. So I re-installed Fluppy, but no matter what I do to the Grub menu file I can't boot Ubuntu. I can do without it...
While I had Ubuntu, I tried to install Flite (the voice-from-text app that's in Fluppy), it went through the motions- download, install, etc, but would it run? No.
One problem with having Grub under the control of Puppy, is that Debian and Ubuntu put the full kernel version number in the menu, and when an update installs a later kernel version the Ubuntu Grub menu gets updated to match. With Grub in Puppy, the menu will then be pointing to an old kernel version, which may still be present or may not.
On my desktop, I have Debian installed and run Puppy from live cd. This has the advantage that I can have umpteen save files, one with GIMP, one with something else big, one basic. Choose which one I want at boot, and don't slow things down when I don't need to.
One thing about the very user-friendly distros is that they make getting under the bonnet (hood) difficult. It's so easy to get into Puppy to tweak the carb settings (so to speak).
gerry
Within the last year, I have installed around 20 virtual machines using Debian.
They soon will replace the Windows 2003 Servers in our company.
Samba+LDAP (replaces Primary Domain Controller/Active Directory) , Zarafa Groupware+Postfix SMPT Mailserver (replaces Outlook+Exchange) and such.
The complexity of such a project is enormous, and requires, that dozends, or hundrets of packages play well together (all the certification mechanisms, Samba, Ldap etc.).
I must make Debian (Lenny) a huge compliment - all the software is wellbalanced and works well together.
(it is another issue, that migrating a complex existing company infrastructure requires a hell of additional configuration).
I love apt-get for such complex projects, in Puppy, this would have been an additional, very difficult issue to compile all the serversoftware on my own.
Puppy however still is my main operating system at home - and it is simply excellent for this purpose (also on the EEEPC).
Desktop-Software usually does not have such a complexity as serversoftware, and in this case, the simple packageformat of the PETs is something I prefer.
Without a full dependency database, there also is no risk, to break it, if you compile own programs, what gives you a lot of flexibility.
Another pro for puppy is, that it is made "from users for users". Puppy does not aim at the enterprise market (like server consolidation), and so the resulting system is optimized for the private enduser, making it a slim, fast and powerfull system
Mark
They soon will replace the Windows 2003 Servers in our company.
Samba+LDAP (replaces Primary Domain Controller/Active Directory) , Zarafa Groupware+Postfix SMPT Mailserver (replaces Outlook+Exchange) and such.
The complexity of such a project is enormous, and requires, that dozends, or hundrets of packages play well together (all the certification mechanisms, Samba, Ldap etc.).
I must make Debian (Lenny) a huge compliment - all the software is wellbalanced and works well together.
(it is another issue, that migrating a complex existing company infrastructure requires a hell of additional configuration).
I love apt-get for such complex projects, in Puppy, this would have been an additional, very difficult issue to compile all the serversoftware on my own.
Puppy however still is my main operating system at home - and it is simply excellent for this purpose (also on the EEEPC).
Desktop-Software usually does not have such a complexity as serversoftware, and in this case, the simple packageformat of the PETs is something I prefer.
Without a full dependency database, there also is no risk, to break it, if you compile own programs, what gives you a lot of flexibility.
Another pro for puppy is, that it is made "from users for users". Puppy does not aim at the enterprise market (like server consolidation), and so the resulting system is optimized for the private enduser, making it a slim, fast and powerfull system
Mark
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=173456#173456]my recommended links[/url]
-
Lobster
- Official Crustacean
- Posts: 15522
- Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 06:06
- Location: Paradox Realm
- Contact:
After an early Slackware installation that was about as much fun as BP
I installed the then fashionable Debian based Knoppix.
I used it eventually to install a minimalist Debian on my hard drive.
Knoppix ran from CD, which I thought was the height of coolness.
It certainly was stable and almost usable.
I just was not geek enough to understand Klaus Knopper
and his friends talking developer uber-speak-leet.
I used to hang out in the Puppy forums and listen to explanations
that were intelligible.
I did not actually use Puppy much
Why it was too small and ran some weird Dillo browser and
a wordprocessor and graphic program from the 1950's.
Tedtext
http://www.nllgg.nl/Ted/
and xpaint
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XPaint
It was kinda of cute though . . .
and then . . . I kinda started using Puppy . . .
Puppy
Choice Linux
I installed the then fashionable Debian based Knoppix.
I used it eventually to install a minimalist Debian on my hard drive.
Knoppix ran from CD, which I thought was the height of coolness.
It certainly was stable and almost usable.
I just was not geek enough to understand Klaus Knopper
and his friends talking developer uber-speak-leet.
I used to hang out in the Puppy forums and listen to explanations
that were intelligible.
I did not actually use Puppy much
Why it was too small and ran some weird Dillo browser and
a wordprocessor and graphic program from the 1950's.
Tedtext
http://www.nllgg.nl/Ted/
and xpaint
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XPaint
It was kinda of cute though . . .
and then . . . I kinda started using Puppy . . .
Puppy
Choice Linux
@ICPUG- anyone on this forum can write a bit of improved code and put it forward for inclusion, with the expectation that if it is any good it may be incorporated. Try that with Debian! And if I find a bug, I can have a direct contact (via the forum) with the developer. The Debian forum has great long threads about things like configuring Icewm, but no threads like we have where the users can actually converse with and influence the developers.
gerry
gerry
Also developers can play different roles.Made by developers for them to have fun.
- At work, I am a developer, who works on enterprise solutions.
- At home, I am a developer, who wants to tune Puppy to work great on my desktop, to surf the web, play games, watch HDTV videos.
So I am a user, and when I spread this work, this is "from the private user for the private user".
So this is no contradiction.
In addition, even non developers were able in the past, to create stunning puplets.
Puppy itself is a system, that reflects the personal preferences of Barry.
But not everyone likes seamonkey for example.
As Puppy can be easiliy remastered, we also have derivates, that instead use Firefox, add the VLC media player, and other popular programs.
So people have a great choice from other users (without deeper development skills) for an "optimized" (or better: "customized") system.
Mark
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=173456#173456]my recommended links[/url]
-
RetroTechGuy
- Posts: 2947
- Joined: Tue 15 Dec 2009, 17:20
- Location: USA
Since someone has revived the thread...gerry wrote:I like Debian because: It's stable. Apt is marvelous. I like the idea of security updates. I have a minimal install of Debian Lenny on my OLD desktop, which runs very well. Over the years it's had a new lock, a new stock, and a new barrel, but it's the same install- all my configurations and so on stay through all the changes.
Yes, I have always liked Debian. I ran v1.3 for about 10 years (why update it if it works?...
). It typically has pretty good support for a wide range of hardware (including old junkers like I own). And I've loaded a number of .deb packages into my Puppy.I've been running Puppy pretty much exclusively at home for several months (all internet usage is through it).
I did recently try a net install of Debian 5.x. The install choked at my wireless router, since it couldn't figure out how to request a password, rather than continue to bash its head into the concrete wall until it crashed... I haven't gotten back to playing with it yet...
And Puppy is so damn easy to "install" (I hardly dare call it an "installation", as it is so painless...), that it's rather hard to get back to Debian...