Reading Linux

I tried it because my idea of the perfect distro right now has really good package management (like gentoo) but is binary for quicker installation (unlike gentoo). I'd also prefer that it handle hardware setup for me to save time, but I can live without that if the package management is good enough.

Arch doesn't really setup anything for you. So no points there. I got it to install fine, got X running, etc. But quickly ran into packages that weren't in the repository. The first one I couldn't find was PyPanel. I can forgive this, because PyPanel is a fairly obscure package. But to its credit, Gentoo has it. So I download PyPanel by hand and begin installing it -- it needs python-xlib. python-xlib is not a rare package, but it's not in the repository either. I thought this was kind of strange, and started looking up how to make my own package for it. I run into a snag and go into #archlinux of freenode to get help debugging it. I paste the contents of the PKGBUILD file (what arch linux uses to make packages) on rafb.net and paste the link into the chat. It goes something like this:

Me: Can you see what's wrong?

Guy: Dude, why are you making a python-xlib package?

Me: Huh?

Guy: There's already like 20 of those.

Me: Oh, what repository do I need to add? I must not have it.

Guy: It's in AUR.

Me: Hrm, can't find AUR on the wiki, what's the url?

Guy: It's not a repository.

Me: Eh?

Guy: It's folders full of community made packages. If a package you put in AUR gets really popular, it gets put in the official repositories.

Me: Um, if there are 20 working python-xlib packages, why the hell hasn't it been put in the official repositories?

Guy: *shrug* I thought the policy sucked so I went back to slackware.

There's a vote of confidence for you.

"Nurture your mind with great thoughts, for you will never go any higher than you think."

This post was edited by Tetrazome on Jul 16, 2005.

Well arch has some "holes" in its repository, but mind you - it's still young (0.7) Distribution. Besides, there might be a custom repository somewhere with packages that you seek.

That tur is located at tur.Archlinux.Org and it's a list of additional repositories with some extra stuff (like e17, for instance)

besides there is still a way to make your own packages (haven't tried yet myself)

"Life is a queue. You come in, hang around for a bit, get some service, then depart."

Yeah, I agree. I wish package managers were more MSI-ish. I really like the way you can install about anything in windows and it automatically registers to the database of installed packages. Software installation is one of the key dividers between distrobutions and I don't beleive it should be. I'm suprised there are no alsa-esque standards for it (as opposed to something like Arts, which is the rpm of package management for sound). I mean, really, if it would work like that we could really nil package managers and have make installs register to said list with a list of installed files and uninstallation instructions and we'd be set.

A solution like this would be ideal. Perhaps I should start looking into this? Standardization is something I know every distrobution needs. We should just have tarballs, not rpm's and debs. Sheesh... Silly linux developers. :)

What's even better is, a solution like this wouldn't nuke portage, rather it'd make it even easier to work with. Not to mention, such features would really come in handy. I suppose such a database would have a hard time register binary packages, but that's where a package management system like portage can step in. :)

No longer would your make installed packages be clobbered by a portage package, rather, you'd see, hey, he installed this himself, I'll ask if he'd like to update. That's what I'd like to see in linux altogether, more standardization.

I should be ashamed of myself.

This post was edited by Aynjell on Jul 17, 2005.

A solution like this would be ideal. Perhaps I should start looking into this? Standardization is something I know every distrobution needs. We should just have tarballs, not rpm's and debs. Sheesh... Silly linux developers. :)

heh, check out autopackage http://www.autopackage.org/

"Life is a queue. You come in, hang around for a bit, get some service, then depart."

... the only thing is, autopackage is useless. More or less completely useless.

It only works for apps written in C. BOOM. There goes everything QT/KDE and a ton of other applications people regularly use.

They say that it's possible, they just need more volunteers. But they already release 1.0 which promises backwards compatibility. How they can release a packager that can't package a gigaton of software out there and call it release ready is beyond me... :P

Hmm... maybe I take that back. The site says 1.2 has "much improved C++ support." I would love to see an autopackage based distro. By their own admittance autopackage isn't meant to replace traditional package managers, it's meant more for desktop apps, but a distro that used it for that side of it would still be sweet.

"Nurture your mind with great thoughts, for you will never go any higher than you think."

This post was edited by Tetrazome on Jul 17, 2005.

I did not say i like it. Maybe it has the future. For now klik is also a nice way of running software with easy installation (or even no installation :D)

http://Klik.Atekon.De/

btw. The arch bashing could also be applied to debian as well - it took me quite a few days to find an repository with php5, since it's not available by defaylt :/

"Life is a queue. You come in, hang around for a bit, get some service, then depart."

Debian has the packages. They're just old as dirt :P

Kubuntu/Ubuntu are much better about this, but they suffer from the, "massive upgrade every 12 months" mentality instead of the continuous upgrade philosophy of arch/gentoo. So packages are cutting edge for a little while, then the situation gets worse and worse.

"Nurture your mind with great thoughts, for you will never go any higher than you think."

The idea of an easy to install distro with good binary package management is purely fantasy in my opinion. I like the idea and premise behind Ubuntu but have not had good luck in getting it to work in its preconfigured form. It seems to me that the binary distro's over the years have always been too limiting for me and have never ran as well as a source based distro. I love Gentoo but the one thing that is not so appealing about it is the installation process. It takes a very long time to get from nothing to a complete working box with all the software you want. The stage 3 install just seems like a tainted system once it's all up and running. You end up replacing those preconfigured binary packages in the long run anyway.

I'm still looking for that distribution euphoria, but I don't think it's going to magically come into reality anytime soon.

The stage 3 install just seems like a tainted system once it's all up and running.

I don't know if I've mentioned this, but it's been said that Stage 1 has issues with the Toolchain. Apparently, some things end up getting built teh wrong way etc. etc.

I always do a stage 1 on 3. Throw a stage 3 down, get it booted, and rebuild the entire system from source. That way you get assurance that your system will work sooner, you get just as much speed, and if the toolchain bit is true, you can avoid that as well.

As far as I am concerned, stage 1 is deprecated. :-P

I should be ashamed of myself.

This post was edited by Aynjell on Jul 17, 2005.

Hmm, didn't have a problem with stage 1 when I did it. My luck might have been better because everything was still gcc 3.3 though.

"Nurture your mind with great thoughts, for you will never go any higher than you think."