Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux helpSpecial Offers
Feature
Why the DCC Alliance needs to love Synaptic
By Robin 'Roblimo' Miller
on
October 10, 2005 (8:00:00 AM)
Share
Print
Comments
Debian users have always boasted that their Advanced Package Tool (APT) was the best and fastest way there has ever been to install and delete software. They were right, except for two details: First, many computer users are scared of the command line -- and APT is a command line utility. Second, even for users not afraid of the command line, setting download repositories and other parameters was not easy unless you spent enough of your time administering computers to remember all the text commands it took to make APT do what you wanted. Then came Synaptic, which promised to make Debian software installs GUI-friendly. Not long after that came a version of Synaptic that didn't crash every time I tried to use it. And finally, in late 2004, Synaptic became so lovable that I would no longer want to have a desktop computer without it.
We can go on and on about how the GUI (Graphical User Interface) administration tools are only for lame users, but the reality is that most people use their computers as office machines, Internet terminals, and entertainment devices, and have no more interest in learning their inner workings than most car owners have in learning how to balance tires.
As long as it took command line skills to administer Debian, it was not a good distro choice for most computer users. If they wanted to have Debian's benefits they were better off using commercial Debian derivatives such as Xandros or Linspire, which worked to hide Debian's complexities behind a friendly face. Otherwise, they were probably better off sticking with SUSE, Mandrake (now Mandriva), and other RPM-based distros that made administration as easy as they could for the technically unhip.
Community vs. Commercial
I had some input into the development of SimplyMEPIS, a commercial, Debian-based distro that came out in mid-2004. I wrote a book called Point & Click Linux! based on it, and in the process of preparing that book I tested more than 200 software packages for possible inclusion in the SimplyMEPIS CD that came with the book. Synaptic was one of the packages I tested and, reluctantly, rejected. MEPIS developer Warren Woodford had added a little code to KPackage to make it function as a GUI front end for APT, and the Warren-ized KPackage, while far from perfect, was easier to use and crashed less than the version of Synaptic that was available at the time.
I chose MEPIS for my book because Warren was more amenable than most other distro publishers to making freely redistributable versions of his work available while still providing enough non-free add-ons -- including Adobe Reader, RealPlayer, Flash Player, and Java -- to give new Linux users the kind of full-featured multimedia Internet experience they were used to getting with Windows. I watched Warren struggle with a basic decision each distro publisher must make over and over again: "Should I trust the community to improve essential software that needs significant work to become useful for non-geek users, or should I write an alternative myself?"
This gets to the heart of another question: "What value does a commercial Linux distribution add that makes it worth paying for?"
My personal answer is, "convenience."
I'm willing to pay money for the convenience of having software packages that all work together, all my security updates in one place, and steady improvements that I can download and install without thinking much about them. In other words, I want "It Just Works" computing. Ideally, support should not be an issue because everything should work well enough that support is not needed. But if it is, I would like to have a decent source of email or phone support -- preferably both -- available.
Members of the DCC Alliance -- including MEPIS -- are working together to come up with a common, Debian-based, LSB-compliant "core" system and group of packages they will all share and share alike. This does not mean all Alliance member distributions will be alike, just that they will be more compatible with each other than they have been in the past, and hopefully stay compatible with Debian itself -- especially when it comes to package installation and dependency resolution.
Naturally, the more APT and Synaptic development work done by DCC Alliance members that makes its way back into the Debian core, the better things are for everyone. In an ideal world, any piece of software for Linux could be installed in any distribution. Neither community nor commercial software developers would worry about producing RPMs and DEBs for specific "flavors" of Linux. They could simply put out a Linux version as they now put out a Windows version, and users running Ubuntu, Fedora, Debian, and Mandriva would all be able to run it without modification or special packaging. But we don't live in an ideal world.
Why the DCC Alliance needs Synaptic
Sadly, it looks like the RPM/DEB divide is going to be with us for a good long time. And with Red Hat and SUSE both on the RPM side, and with Red Hat and SUSE's parent, Novell, doing a high percentage of the world's enterprise-oriented Linux advertising and PR, RPM is probably going to stay the dominant package management format for commercial Linux users, and the software developers that cater to them, for many years.
This means commercial distribution vendors working on the Debian side must work extra-hard to make life easy for their users.
Synaptic (combined with APT) is their secret weapon -- if they choose to use it. It has matured to the point where I like it better than the Windows add/remove software utility, SUSE's YaST, and all others I have tried. I suspect that I am not alone in my affection for Synaptic. It is a good, user-friendly program that does an essential job -- and does it well.
If DCC Alliance members actively support Synaptic, as a group, they will have a mutual competitive edge over their RPM-based competitors (and Microsoft). They will also make free Ubuntu and free Debian more popular, which will increase the demand for .deb-packaged software, and this, too, will help them increase revenue.
Of course, we can apply the same "cooperation is better than competition for everyone involved" thought process I just applied to Synaptic to many other open source projects. And there will still be plenty of room for different Linux distribution publishers to compete on the grounds of convenience, support, breadth of software offered, pre-built themes, and other factors that don't make them incompatible with each other technically but preserve their identities and brand differentiation.
I worry about whether the DCC Alliance will manage to do this. I've seen so many attempts to unify Linux burst on the scene, then fade away, that I am not going to get my hopes up this time around until I see at least a year's worth of cooperation.
Meanwhile, I will go on using Synaptic, no matter which Debian-based distribution I use. And I suspect many other Debian and Debian-derivative devotees will, too, even if DCC Alliance members don't support it as much as they should.
Comments
on Why the DCC Alliance needs to love SynapticNote: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.
The problem that really is with Linux is the amount of choice that is available for a use. Want fast i686-optimized distro - you got it! Want a slow, bloated i386-based distro - you got that one, too. And with choice comes responsibility and the need to actually know what is going on "under the hood". For MS user who likes hand holding the fact that he/she has to make choices (or learn to make them) - it seems terrifying. There is nothing else to do than stop whining, start learning and find a distro that suits you and stick with it!
"On Microsoft Windows they have<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.exe or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.msi and it works for everybody."
Don't put words in my mouth, nor the mouths of millions of people who it DOES NOT work for. It doesn't work for me because I find it for low-brow computer users, the same users who (a) don't care much about security and (b) want to keep it simple stupid because they are stupid.
"And the kickass NSIS installer."
Both of which have what security options/methods to ensure the contents are secure? None.
"On Linux slackware have<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.tgz, redhat<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.rpm, debian<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb, that sucks that there is so many different and incompatible across distributions."
And yet there are tools like alien to bridge the gap, or compiling from source. Are the users going to be running one distro like they would if they used Windows? Then they would be using one format for the most part, and your argument (or poor trolling job) falls apart.
"Also why Linux cant have a LinuxUpdate website like WindowsUpdate. And when you goto it, it checks what software and version you have on your system, then presents a list of newer avaible software and allows you to download and install them?"
WindowsUpdate? LOL! With Ubuntu and Synaptic (or SUSE and YaST, Debian and apt, etc.) it's far superior to WindowsUpdate: Updates are almost all open source, meaning I can see what I'm downloading and updating for myself so I know I'm not getting a backdoor in my system from a loving "trust me if you can" closed source overlord (can you say the same with WindowsUpdate, troll?)
WindowsUpdate needs to be like Linux updates, where you can download from thousands of different choices of programs and update them with a few clicks.
WindowsUpdate doesn't give me that option, nor do I see the option of new kernels supporting new hardware being offered.
Clearly, Windows, WindowsUpdate, and Windows<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.exe files are years behind the features of Linux.
But why am I responding to what is likely another paid FUD spreader from the beast of redmond?
Windows sucks
Don't put words in my mouth, nor the mouths of millions of people who it DOES NOT work for. It doesn't work for me because I find it for low-brow computer users, the same users who (a) don't care much about security and (b) want to keep it simple stupid because they are stupid.
"And the kickass NSIS installer."
Both of which have what security options/methods to ensure the contents are secure? None.
"On Linux slackware have<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.tgz, redhat<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.rpm, debian<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb, that sucks that there is so many different and incompatible across distributions."
And yet there are tools like alien to bridge the gap, or compiling from source. Are the users going to be running one distro like they would if they used Windows? Then they would be using one format for the most part, and your argument (or poor trolling job) falls apart.
"Also why Linux cant have a LinuxUpdate website like WindowsUpdate. And when you goto it, it checks what software and version you have on your system, then presents a list of newer avaible software and allows you to download and install them?"
WindowsUpdate? LOL! With Ubuntu and Synaptic (or SUSE and YaST, Debian and apt, etc.) it's far superior to WindowsUpdate: Updates are almost all open source, meaning I can see what I'm downloading and updating for myself so I know I'm not getting a backdoor in my system from a loving "trust me if you can" closed source overlord (can you say the same with WindowsUpdate, troll?)
WindowsUpdate needs to be like Linux updates, where you can download from thousands of different choices of programs and update them with a few clicks.
WindowsUpdate doesn't give me that option, nor do I see the option of new kernels supporting new hardware being offered.
Clearly, Windows, WindowsUpdate, and Windows<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.exe files are years behind the features of Linux.
But why am I responding to what is likely another paid FUD spreader from the beast of redmond?
Windows sucks
Í am not paid.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)
Well depending on what distribution I run, I must get different packages (rpm, tgz, deb, etc) depending on what distribution I use. That causes alot work for the guy who creates the packages, and not package for every distribution is released or they get delayed or needs to get contributed by other people.
Normal users dont want to hassle with libraries, dependencies, command line or compiling from source.
Well depending on what distribution I run, I must get different packages (rpm, tgz, deb, etc) depending on what distribution I use. That causes alot work for the guy who creates the packages, and not package for every distribution is released or they get delayed or needs to get contributed by other people.
Normal users dont want to hassle with libraries, dependencies, command line or compiling from source.
"Normal users dont want to hassle with libraries, dependencies, command line or compiling from source."
Your 'Normal users':
* get in the way of innovation.
* have supported a convicted monopoly which has stifled innovation for years
* Will be stupid no matter what format is before them
* If started on one operating system, should not expect the other operating system to be exactly like it, the same with riding a bike vs. driving a car vs. flying a plane
Stupidity is always the bottom line excuse, and allowing stupid people to control where technology goes is exactly why we have so many problems that we have today.
Your 'Normal users':
* get in the way of innovation.
* have supported a convicted monopoly which has stifled innovation for years
* Will be stupid no matter what format is before them
* If started on one operating system, should not expect the other operating system to be exactly like it, the same with riding a bike vs. driving a car vs. flying a plane
Stupidity is always the bottom line excuse, and allowing stupid people to control where technology goes is exactly why we have so many problems that we have today.
Software that's a bitch to use isn't exactly an innovation.
You aren't even talking about what the other person is trying to talk about.
Pardon my french, but you're an asshole.
You aren't even talking about what the other person is trying to talk about.
Pardon my french, but you're an asshole.
I am not sure I understand what you are asking. The major distros make it just too easy to upgrade apps and the whole distro as they improve the availability on their servers, which is constantly (especially easy and well-tested are debian/.deb-based distros because of all the testing debian undergos).
As the other poster said, with Linux you have two important things that you don't have with Windows. One is that the apps are essentially all open source (the exception only applies in some cases and if you are paying for your distro a monthly or yearly membership fee like Linspire's program). Two is that you have the option to know what will be installed and have the option to say no.
Now, can things be made more intuitive? Sure. But things are continuously improving. Also, can things be more cohesive in terms of you being able to get what you want, whenever, from wherever, and have it work? Yes, but that misses the point when you consider that you already have access to a lot more than you would on Windows (at least if you factor in safety, cost, and spiffiness). What will improve as distros compete is to have their system package manager or some filter on their system allow you to get whatever from wherever and have it just work. [There are already some things like this, though they aren't fully developed (what is?) and won't work for *every* case (what will?).]
Also, as the Linux market grows and people cry out louder and for more to proprietary companies, more proprietary apps will be available easily at least on the major paying distros. Also, everyone that goes to Linux is lost for a while, but eventually you learn a trick here or there if it can make a big difference (things like<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./configure && make to get that program you just can't wait any longer for).
In the end, remember this. To guarantee safety, people must test first. If I write a trojan and put it on the net and you download it because you want the latest zigaNuga and your computer blows up and you complain about the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb not working well with your other<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb's or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.rpm's, there will be few tears shed for you. Think of all the trash people accumulate via Windows that they are completely oblivious to. Sure, Windows just works. I guess it's true. Some people want the poisoned apples NOW, before they have been washed and dewormed.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..they'll always have Windows (well, until Microsoft in forced into early retirement).
There is room for the people that want to play it safe and wait and there is room for those that want to play fast and loose. If you are of the latter type AND want everything delivered Rush Order with all the trimmings, then Linux is probably not ripe yet (is Windows?). Try back in a year or three. And to speed things up, complain to whoever makes your favorite application, game, or virus. Tell them, you want Linux support NOW.
ps: Have you tried linux lately? I don't think many normal linux-using people compile from source anymore. You'd be surprised at how much debian (eg, Xandros or Ubuntu or SimplyMEPIS) has available. Also, just as I don't recomment someone walk into Windows, as a newbie, without help from someone with experience, I don't suggest you go into Linux without help if you are not comfortable with it. Ask someone close (if you don't want to research a bit on the net) so that you can install and save your personal stuff to usb flash. This way you can wreck your system or try a new flavor every other week and still keep your good stuff in tact. If you can play it fast and loose this way, you will enjoy finding all the ways to wreck the system and test out the newest and weirdest apps.. and then just clean your hands of the mess and have a makeover to start again.
As the other poster said, with Linux you have two important things that you don't have with Windows. One is that the apps are essentially all open source (the exception only applies in some cases and if you are paying for your distro a monthly or yearly membership fee like Linspire's program). Two is that you have the option to know what will be installed and have the option to say no.
Now, can things be made more intuitive? Sure. But things are continuously improving. Also, can things be more cohesive in terms of you being able to get what you want, whenever, from wherever, and have it work? Yes, but that misses the point when you consider that you already have access to a lot more than you would on Windows (at least if you factor in safety, cost, and spiffiness). What will improve as distros compete is to have their system package manager or some filter on their system allow you to get whatever from wherever and have it just work. [There are already some things like this, though they aren't fully developed (what is?) and won't work for *every* case (what will?).]
Also, as the Linux market grows and people cry out louder and for more to proprietary companies, more proprietary apps will be available easily at least on the major paying distros. Also, everyone that goes to Linux is lost for a while, but eventually you learn a trick here or there if it can make a big difference (things like<nobr> <wbr></nobr>./configure && make to get that program you just can't wait any longer for).
In the end, remember this. To guarantee safety, people must test first. If I write a trojan and put it on the net and you download it because you want the latest zigaNuga and your computer blows up and you complain about the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb not working well with your other<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb's or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.rpm's, there will be few tears shed for you. Think of all the trash people accumulate via Windows that they are completely oblivious to. Sure, Windows just works. I guess it's true. Some people want the poisoned apples NOW, before they have been washed and dewormed.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..they'll always have Windows (well, until Microsoft in forced into early retirement).
There is room for the people that want to play it safe and wait and there is room for those that want to play fast and loose. If you are of the latter type AND want everything delivered Rush Order with all the trimmings, then Linux is probably not ripe yet (is Windows?). Try back in a year or three. And to speed things up, complain to whoever makes your favorite application, game, or virus. Tell them, you want Linux support NOW.
ps: Have you tried linux lately? I don't think many normal linux-using people compile from source anymore. You'd be surprised at how much debian (eg, Xandros or Ubuntu or SimplyMEPIS) has available. Also, just as I don't recomment someone walk into Windows, as a newbie, without help from someone with experience, I don't suggest you go into Linux without help if you are not comfortable with it. Ask someone close (if you don't want to research a bit on the net) so that you can install and save your personal stuff to usb flash. This way you can wreck your system or try a new flavor every other week and still keep your good stuff in tact. If you can play it fast and loose this way, you will enjoy finding all the ways to wreck the system and test out the newest and weirdest apps.. and then just clean your hands of the mess and have a makeover to start again.
Normal users dont want to hassle with libraries, dependencies, command line or compiling from source.
Yes, but assholes think you're a moron if you don't spend at least 5 hours a day working for a *** ****ing machine.
Yes, but assholes think you're a moron if you don't spend at least 5 hours a day working for a *** ****ing machine.
Yes, Windows JUST WORKS!!! It's great, isn't it?
Linux has the no-spyware thing and that's why I love it but Windows just works.
But that's not QUITE why. It's not an issue of how the installation is performed. In fact, executables and such would actually not work in Linux, it'd be a major pain in the ass cause of the way the local security works.
Now, here's the reason why these things don't work:
1) Sometimes programs link to stupid things. They'll like to a library very very specific. "libGtk.so.2.156" or something, and the someone tries to install the poorly built RPM into a system which just has 'libgtk.so.2' and... ERROR! This is just carelessness on the part of the packager.
2) Very often, programs are built to require libraries which aren't standard... Or are they standard? Which standard?
People like to build for code reuse, Linux coders are very uppity about it. Which is nice, but when your program requires some obscure module and the user has to go manually install 5 dependencies, things are just plain obnoxious.
There is no excuse for that. I saw some asshole post something like "They like to keep it simple because they are stupid". No, they like to keep it simple because they're not dateless nerds who spend all their time learning what an 'RPM' is.
Basically what we need for both is a standard.
Not like the LSB, I just looked at LSB 2.0 and it doesn't define nearly enough. 3.0 might work but I haven't checked.
But everything needs to be defined into what makes up the "open source platform". This means X, Gtk, Qt, etc. inclusive.
Basically, all distros compliant to the standard would have the listed libraries and programs installed for compatability.
Programs compliant to the standard would link to thinks libraries ONLY - dependancies not in the standard ought to be statically linked.
Then you would have packages built for the "standard" and they would install on any distro compliant...
What do ya'll think of that? Comments, suggestions? Does LSB 3.0 already do this?
Linux has the no-spyware thing and that's why I love it but Windows just works.
But that's not QUITE why. It's not an issue of how the installation is performed. In fact, executables and such would actually not work in Linux, it'd be a major pain in the ass cause of the way the local security works.
Now, here's the reason why these things don't work:
1) Sometimes programs link to stupid things. They'll like to a library very very specific. "libGtk.so.2.156" or something, and the someone tries to install the poorly built RPM into a system which just has 'libgtk.so.2' and... ERROR! This is just carelessness on the part of the packager.
2) Very often, programs are built to require libraries which aren't standard... Or are they standard? Which standard?
People like to build for code reuse, Linux coders are very uppity about it. Which is nice, but when your program requires some obscure module and the user has to go manually install 5 dependencies, things are just plain obnoxious.
There is no excuse for that. I saw some asshole post something like "They like to keep it simple because they are stupid". No, they like to keep it simple because they're not dateless nerds who spend all their time learning what an 'RPM' is.
Basically what we need for both is a standard.
Not like the LSB, I just looked at LSB 2.0 and it doesn't define nearly enough. 3.0 might work but I haven't checked.
But everything needs to be defined into what makes up the "open source platform". This means X, Gtk, Qt, etc. inclusive.
Basically, all distros compliant to the standard would have the listed libraries and programs installed for compatability.
Programs compliant to the standard would link to thinks libraries ONLY - dependancies not in the standard ought to be statically linked.
Then you would have packages built for the "standard" and they would install on any distro compliant...
What do ya'll think of that? Comments, suggestions? Does LSB 3.0 already do this?
Why Synaptic vrs other functionaly similar programs such as smart, kyum, adept, yast or klik. Personally I find synaptic works great for me (even though I am a kde type of person) but nowhere have I found a comparison of these products. Smart especially looks interesting because it can use mutilple types of repositories and klick because it removes the dependency issues pretty much altogether.
klick relies on knowing what packages normally comes with your distro rather than providing self contained packages. I've installed 2 packages on sid that way and they both were half functional because of missing dependencies.
Why did they have to come so close and still screw up ?
Why did they have to come so close and still screw up ?
I've gotten a number of less-than-adept computer users excited about Linux when I showed them the ease of installing and updating using Synaptic on Mepis. With just two clicks, it will find and install all updates to your system, a must for new users.
i think you'd like these.
there is the update notifier in the gnome-panel, that alerts you to any upgrades.
there is add/remove programs, that has a catorgorised list of desktop programs you can install or remove.
and there is full on synaptic, for more advanced work.
they all play nicely together.
plus if you try to enable file sharing from the file sharing prefferences or try to set the clock to update from the internet, it will ask you (if necissary) if you want to install the relevent package.
could installing software and staying up to date be any easier?
there is the update notifier in the gnome-panel, that alerts you to any upgrades.
there is add/remove programs, that has a catorgorised list of desktop programs you can install or remove.
and there is full on synaptic, for more advanced work.
they all play nicely together.
plus if you try to enable file sharing from the file sharing prefferences or try to set the clock to update from the internet, it will ask you (if necissary) if you want to install the relevent package.
could installing software and staying up to date be any easier?
Does Synaptic even know what an 'application' is?
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 11, 2005 11:45 AM
Last I checked, it did not. Why should users go wading through an ocean of small CLI utilities, libs and services to find an application like Kino or Amarok?
Notice that Xandros and Linspire are a part of the DCC, and the former has been assigned the technology lead. The Xandros Networks utility is superior to Synaptic in that it defaults to a mode where only apps and patches selected by the distro maintainer are displayed (usually with a familiar icon to accompany the description). It has an "expert mode" that functions not unlike Synaptic however, where all the nuts-and-bolts are visible. XN also doesn't connect to "Debian Universe" by default, although this is easily enabled in preferences with a couple of mouse clicks. It has a default status page on startup that higlights newly-available apps and patches.
If DCC goes as far as producing a GUI package manager, it should have the above functionality. Average users (and even advanced ones from Windows and Mac platforms) must be able to easily get a handle on applications (and services for admins), because those are what drive widespread adoption of an OS.
Notice that Xandros and Linspire are a part of the DCC, and the former has been assigned the technology lead. The Xandros Networks utility is superior to Synaptic in that it defaults to a mode where only apps and patches selected by the distro maintainer are displayed (usually with a familiar icon to accompany the description). It has an "expert mode" that functions not unlike Synaptic however, where all the nuts-and-bolts are visible. XN also doesn't connect to "Debian Universe" by default, although this is easily enabled in preferences with a couple of mouse clicks. It has a default status page on startup that higlights newly-available apps and patches.
If DCC goes as far as producing a GUI package manager, it should have the above functionality. Average users (and even advanced ones from Windows and Mac platforms) must be able to easily get a handle on applications (and services for admins), because those are what drive widespread adoption of an OS.
Re:Does Synaptic even know what an 'application' i
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 12, 2005 06:18 AM
ubuntu has an "add application" program which uses apt, and just shows desktop applications, very easy to use. works as an apt front end, so it plays well with synaptic.
Although I use it most days, it's a pain to go through all the libraries. In the end I only do searches. Also, there should be a small area for some package summary with some graphics<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....
Localisation & translation of pkgs description
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 11, 2005 05:13 PM
Something that english speakers may not have noticed, is the fact that every<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb (and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.rpm too) package description (both one-liners and the longer description) are solely in english.
While having good packages management tools helps a lot for the begginers, this lack of translation hurt those that don't understand well the english language (or the technical/computer english language: "wysiwyg", "driver", "desktop"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...).
The Linux desktop (gnome and kde) is about to be perfectly localised, the packages management tools are getting very usable for begginers, but I still hear, for every begginer (there in France): "hu, apache ? abiword ? j'en ai besoin ?", "que signifie ' WYSIWYG word processor based on GTK2' ? "I need a web browser, where is it on the synaptic list ?"...).
Strangely, I see no effort on any distribution's packaging system to include localised/translated packages description.
While having good packages management tools helps a lot for the begginers, this lack of translation hurt those that don't understand well the english language (or the technical/computer english language: "wysiwyg", "driver", "desktop"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...).
The Linux desktop (gnome and kde) is about to be perfectly localised, the packages management tools are getting very usable for begginers, but I still hear, for every begginer (there in France): "hu, apache ? abiword ? j'en ai besoin ?", "que signifie ' WYSIWYG word processor based on GTK2' ? "I need a web browser, where is it on the synaptic list ?"...).
Strangely, I see no effort on any distribution's packaging system to include localised/translated packages description.
>>Also, there should be a small area for some package summary with some graphics<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....
Would you really like to be forced to download some graphics every time you update repository information?
For the time being you have to download about 3MB to update repository information(in Ubuntu). If you wanted to download graphics then it would be 10MB or more. I don't know what's the progress of a ubuntu project that was supposed to give you this information(screenshots, comments,etc), but the aim of the project is that this information could be accessed with a browser.
Since almost all the distributions have similar packages (I mean versions of packages) there could be some central database e.g. packageinformation.org or whatever that would store information about all the possible apps, libs, games, etc. You could access it with a browser (some search engine, browse by category) or using synaptic (you select a package and then choose screenshots tab and synaptic downloads all the necessary information).
Would you really like to be forced to download some graphics every time you update repository information?
For the time being you have to download about 3MB to update repository information(in Ubuntu). If you wanted to download graphics then it would be 10MB or more. I don't know what's the progress of a ubuntu project that was supposed to give you this information(screenshots, comments,etc), but the aim of the project is that this information could be accessed with a browser.
Since almost all the distributions have similar packages (I mean versions of packages) there could be some central database e.g. packageinformation.org or whatever that would store information about all the possible apps, libs, games, etc. You could access it with a browser (some search engine, browse by category) or using synaptic (you select a package and then choose screenshots tab and synaptic downloads all the necessary information).
That requires various changes like not downlaoding the whole thing but just what has changed in the repository. And what changes most is version numbers which is TINY !
But to me, Debian is a development distro (although I've used sid for 2 years now) and synaptic is part of it.
I'll just switch to Ubuntu which is a real realeased distro. Donation will still go to debian I think cause it is THE meta linux distro imho, the one that makes ubuntu,mepis, xandros, linspire, and so many others possible.
But to me, Debian is a development distro (although I've used sid for 2 years now) and synaptic is part of it.
I'll just switch to Ubuntu which is a real realeased distro. Donation will still go to debian I think cause it is THE meta linux distro imho, the one that makes ubuntu,mepis, xandros, linspire, and so many others possible.
Agree about Synaptic. . .available for Fedora, too
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 12, 2005 04:21 AM
It is a great program that helps folks tremendously. BTW, there is a version that works well with RPM packages in the Fedora line. Don't know if it works with RH or not.
--AR
--AR
You are correct that not all are created equal. The packaging is as important a part as anything else.
A recommendation: try out something based on debian (you keep mentioning rpm).
Also, there ARE applications that are self-enclosed. An example is Firefox. Openoffice.org is another. These groups don't take chances and deliver everything in a separate directory.
For the near future, I would suggest that rather than fret about LSB compliance, that if you (or anyone else) want to sample Linux, you grab any of the more popular distros and start to become acquainted with all of the apps available that you can download automatically if they aren't already on your hard drive (I am thinking a debian based distro or something like Suse's newest which comes with a handful gigabytes of stuff). Don't throw Windows away though, but you may find that you have access to a lot more than you realized.
Say you get something that uses "apt-get" to update (.deb's.. so Suse's distro mentioned earlier won't do because they use<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.rpm). Then say you hear about something interesting while you are surfing or chatting online. Type on a command terminal: "apt-cache search SOMETHINGINTERESTING [enter]" and see what you find. Chances are that you can get it automatically. How? "apt-get install PACKAGENAME". PACKAGENAME comes from the list that will appear after you do "apt-cache search SOMETHINGINTERESTING". SOMETHINGINTERESTING is like the keywords you type when doing a google search and PACKAGENAME is the actual proper name that you get back (like the google results that have ht tp://<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...).
You can then also do "apt-cache show PACKAGENAME" to get a description of the package, though if it is something you came accross on the Internet, you probably already have a clue about what it does.
Do not worry about dependencies with apt-get. It will list any you are missing and offer to download them. [Debian mainteners are good packagers]
Here is an example of the above instructions: "apt-cache search people". On my system this yielded too many results (I guess "people" is a common word). For example, near the end of the list I see "starfighter - 2D scrolling shooter game". Let me now do "apt-cache show starfighter". This is what I get:
Package: starfighter
Version: 1.1-3
Priority: optional
Section: games
Maintainer: Bartosz Fenski
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.3.2.ds1-4), libgcc1 (>= 1:3.4.1-3), libsdl-image1.2 (>= 1.2.3), libsdl-mixer1.2 (>= 1.2.6), libsdl1.2debian (>> 1.2.7+1.2.8), libstdc++5 (>= 1:3.3.4-1), starfighter-data (= 1.1-3)
Architecture: i386
Filename: pool/main/s/starfighter/starfighter_1.1-3_i386.de<nobr>b<wbr></nobr>
Size: 148466
Installed-Size: 424
MD5sum: 1ae2774c3e9a0d1b72bcb32a75eaa84f
Description: 2D scrolling shooter game
After decades of war one company, who had gained powerful supplying both
sides with weaponary, steps forwards and crushes both warring factions
in one swift movement. Using far superior weaponary and AI craft, the
company was completely unstoppable and now no one can stand in their
way. Thousands began to perish under the iron fist of the company. The
people cried out for a saviour, for someone to light this dark hour...
and someone did.
.
Features of the game:
.
o 26 missions over 4 star systems
o Primary and Secondary Weapons (including a laser cannon and a charge weapon)
o A weapon powerup system
o Wingmates
o Missions with Primary and Secondary Objectives
o A Variety of Missions (Protect, Destroy, etc)
o 13 different music tracks
o Boss battles
.
Homepage: <a href="http://www.parallelrealities.co.uk/starfighter.php" title="parallelrealities.co.uk">http://www.parallelrealities.co.uk/starfighter.ph<nobr>p<wbr></nobr> </a parallelrealities.co.uk>
OK, so I am curious, let me type "apt-get install starfighter"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. oops. I was so caught up writing I forgot to mention. You have to be the root (admin) user to install things. OK, well I won't tell you how to do that because it depends on your system. Perhaps something like "su root" followed by some password will put you in the proper state. If so then retype the above. This is what I got:
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
starfighter-data
The following NEW packages will be installed:
starfighter starfighter-data
0 upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 513 not upgraded.
Need to get 2539kB of archives.
After unpacking 4403kB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n]
I typed in "y[enter]" and the download started. Well, this game may stink so I'll leave it at that....
Later, you can do "apt-get update" to have apt check out the server and figure out all the things that could use updating on your system. Then go back to "apt-cache search X" and "apt-get install Y" like before except that this time you will get newer results.. The way it works is that "apt-cache search X" relies on a list that is on the local computer to do the searching against (so you can run this without being online). apt-get/cache/etc never modifies that list unless you tell it to with the enchantment "apt-get update". Then it does go on the Internet and modifies the local info it has. If you never do "apt-get update", the local info will start to grow stale... Also, instead of going online to fetch stuff, it is possible that the distro came in a CD and instead goes to the CD to get stuff. If this is so then you should ask for help from someone that knows (or be prepared to do a lot of reading and/or searching online) so that you can get access to the online stuff because naturally unlike the CD it gets updated continuously. I haven't dealt with this (I bought a low-end computer $200 from Walmart online and it came with Xandros 3.0. here, apt-get is set up to automatically go to Xandros' site.. eventually, I'll probably move it over to debian's sites and see what happens).
If you have bandwidth to spare or time on your hands, after "apt-get update" do "apt-get upgrade". This upgrades the whole system in one shot. I don't do this because if something does go wrong, I want to be able to have a chance of figuring it out. Actually, it should be safe and the system is never in an inconsistent state (well, if power doesn't go out though even then there may be hope) because apt-get downloads everything first, then verifies it for integrity, and only then does it install it. If the connection drops ever, just try again. apt-get keeps partial downloads on disk.
I here that "synaptic" makes the above command line typing unnecessary so you can try that. gee.. just checked and I have the option to download that too. I'll see, maybe later.
A recommendation: try out something based on debian (you keep mentioning rpm).
Also, there ARE applications that are self-enclosed. An example is Firefox. Openoffice.org is another. These groups don't take chances and deliver everything in a separate directory.
For the near future, I would suggest that rather than fret about LSB compliance, that if you (or anyone else) want to sample Linux, you grab any of the more popular distros and start to become acquainted with all of the apps available that you can download automatically if they aren't already on your hard drive (I am thinking a debian based distro or something like Suse's newest which comes with a handful gigabytes of stuff). Don't throw Windows away though, but you may find that you have access to a lot more than you realized.
Say you get something that uses "apt-get" to update (.deb's.. so Suse's distro mentioned earlier won't do because they use<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.rpm). Then say you hear about something interesting while you are surfing or chatting online. Type on a command terminal: "apt-cache search SOMETHINGINTERESTING [enter]" and see what you find. Chances are that you can get it automatically. How? "apt-get install PACKAGENAME". PACKAGENAME comes from the list that will appear after you do "apt-cache search SOMETHINGINTERESTING". SOMETHINGINTERESTING is like the keywords you type when doing a google search and PACKAGENAME is the actual proper name that you get back (like the google results that have ht tp://<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...).
You can then also do "apt-cache show PACKAGENAME" to get a description of the package, though if it is something you came accross on the Internet, you probably already have a clue about what it does.
Do not worry about dependencies with apt-get. It will list any you are missing and offer to download them. [Debian mainteners are good packagers]
Here is an example of the above instructions: "apt-cache search people". On my system this yielded too many results (I guess "people" is a common word). For example, near the end of the list I see "starfighter - 2D scrolling shooter game". Let me now do "apt-cache show starfighter". This is what I get:
Package: starfighter
Version: 1.1-3
Priority: optional
Section: games
Maintainer: Bartosz Fenski
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.3.2.ds1-4), libgcc1 (>= 1:3.4.1-3), libsdl-image1.2 (>= 1.2.3), libsdl-mixer1.2 (>= 1.2.6), libsdl1.2debian (>> 1.2.7+1.2.8), libstdc++5 (>= 1:3.3.4-1), starfighter-data (= 1.1-3)
Architecture: i386
Filename: pool/main/s/starfighter/starfighter_1.1-3_i386.de<nobr>b<wbr></nobr>
Size: 148466
Installed-Size: 424
MD5sum: 1ae2774c3e9a0d1b72bcb32a75eaa84f
Description: 2D scrolling shooter game
After decades of war one company, who had gained powerful supplying both
sides with weaponary, steps forwards and crushes both warring factions
in one swift movement. Using far superior weaponary and AI craft, the
company was completely unstoppable and now no one can stand in their
way. Thousands began to perish under the iron fist of the company. The
people cried out for a saviour, for someone to light this dark hour...
and someone did.
.
Features of the game:
.
o 26 missions over 4 star systems
o Primary and Secondary Weapons (including a laser cannon and a charge weapon)
o A weapon powerup system
o Wingmates
o Missions with Primary and Secondary Objectives
o A Variety of Missions (Protect, Destroy, etc)
o 13 different music tracks
o Boss battles
.
Homepage: <a href="http://www.parallelrealities.co.uk/starfighter.php" title="parallelrealities.co.uk">http://www.parallelrealities.co.uk/starfighter.ph<nobr>p<wbr></nobr> </a parallelrealities.co.uk>
OK, so I am curious, let me type "apt-get install starfighter"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. oops. I was so caught up writing I forgot to mention. You have to be the root (admin) user to install things. OK, well I won't tell you how to do that because it depends on your system. Perhaps something like "su root" followed by some password will put you in the proper state. If so then retype the above. This is what I got:
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
starfighter-data
The following NEW packages will be installed:
starfighter starfighter-data
0 upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 513 not upgraded.
Need to get 2539kB of archives.
After unpacking 4403kB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n]
I typed in "y[enter]" and the download started. Well, this game may stink so I'll leave it at that....
Later, you can do "apt-get update" to have apt check out the server and figure out all the things that could use updating on your system. Then go back to "apt-cache search X" and "apt-get install Y" like before except that this time you will get newer results.. The way it works is that "apt-cache search X" relies on a list that is on the local computer to do the searching against (so you can run this without being online). apt-get/cache/etc never modifies that list unless you tell it to with the enchantment "apt-get update". Then it does go on the Internet and modifies the local info it has. If you never do "apt-get update", the local info will start to grow stale... Also, instead of going online to fetch stuff, it is possible that the distro came in a CD and instead goes to the CD to get stuff. If this is so then you should ask for help from someone that knows (or be prepared to do a lot of reading and/or searching online) so that you can get access to the online stuff because naturally unlike the CD it gets updated continuously. I haven't dealt with this (I bought a low-end computer $200 from Walmart online and it came with Xandros 3.0. here, apt-get is set up to automatically go to Xandros' site.. eventually, I'll probably move it over to debian's sites and see what happens).
If you have bandwidth to spare or time on your hands, after "apt-get update" do "apt-get upgrade". This upgrades the whole system in one shot. I don't do this because if something does go wrong, I want to be able to have a chance of figuring it out. Actually, it should be safe and the system is never in an inconsistent state (well, if power doesn't go out though even then there may be hope) because apt-get downloads everything first, then verifies it for integrity, and only then does it install it. If the connection drops ever, just try again. apt-get keeps partial downloads on disk.
I here that "synaptic" makes the above command line typing unnecessary so you can try that. gee.. just checked and I have the option to download that too. I'll see, maybe later.
I agree with the bulk of your argument. I think that the standardized libs will make a huge difference for 3rd party developers, since oddball crap can be compiled in. The LSB should be working toward this instead of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... well nothing that has made a hill of beans.
I need some comments on this, tell me how ya'll think this would work:
*Basically, there is a set standard that defines what libraries come in a full desktop distro. This covers the GNU, X, Gnome & KDE and other libraries which are considered standard and so on. Maybe SDL...
*A program which requires a library not featured in the standard would simply statically link it into the program.
The goal of the standard is to ensure common libraries so that things usually aren't redundantly statically linked (But this may happen sometimes) but at the same time lay out that certain libraries (Who in the world would just happen to have "pan-tools" unless they installed it manually?) won't be availible and they ought to be compiled into the app.
OR, maybe do something like, the 'RPM' package has the non-standard libraries in it and installs them as dynamically linked shared libraries, this way if someone installs two programs which have common shared libraries, they both get installed.
I'm skipping over details like tracking versions, but that would be in the system too.
The result would basically be that if one has a distro built against the standard, than one only needs to have RPMs (or whatever) built against it as well, not built against the distro specifically, and they would run... Period. With no DLL problems or elaborate networks or anything.
It's a simpler solution to an even simpler problem, I think. Distros and put whatever they want on top of the standard, all it'd be is an assurance that a set of shared libraries is going to be there and under a certain naming scheme.
LSB does this sorta but it doesn't nearly cover enough to define a whole desktop platform, I just looked at LSB 3.0 and it only covers up to some X and OpenGL stuff. Most programs require a lot more than is defined in the LSB specification.
Comments? Suggestions?
*Basically, there is a set standard that defines what libraries come in a full desktop distro. This covers the GNU, X, Gnome & KDE and other libraries which are considered standard and so on. Maybe SDL...
*A program which requires a library not featured in the standard would simply statically link it into the program.
The goal of the standard is to ensure common libraries so that things usually aren't redundantly statically linked (But this may happen sometimes) but at the same time lay out that certain libraries (Who in the world would just happen to have "pan-tools" unless they installed it manually?) won't be availible and they ought to be compiled into the app.
OR, maybe do something like, the 'RPM' package has the non-standard libraries in it and installs them as dynamically linked shared libraries, this way if someone installs two programs which have common shared libraries, they both get installed.
I'm skipping over details like tracking versions, but that would be in the system too.
The result would basically be that if one has a distro built against the standard, than one only needs to have RPMs (or whatever) built against it as well, not built against the distro specifically, and they would run... Period. With no DLL problems or elaborate networks or anything.
It's a simpler solution to an even simpler problem, I think. Distros and put whatever they want on top of the standard, all it'd be is an assurance that a set of shared libraries is going to be there and under a certain naming scheme.
LSB does this sorta but it doesn't nearly cover enough to define a whole desktop platform, I just looked at LSB 3.0 and it only covers up to some X and OpenGL stuff. Most programs require a lot more than is defined in the LSB specification.
Comments? Suggestions?
Package management sucks
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 10, 2005 10:22 PMOn Linux slackware have<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.tgz, redhat<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.rpm, debian<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.deb, that sucks that there is so many different and incompatible across distributions.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(
Also why Linux cant have a LinuxUpdate website like WindowsUpdate. And when you goto it, it checks what software and version you have on your system, then presents a list of newer avaible software and allows you to download and install them?
#