What makes a good package manager?


This is a question that has been bothering me for a while, after realising that pacman, while being aufully close, isn’t actualy perfect. Here are my requirements:

Dependecie tracking:

pacman – Yes

apt-get – yes

rpm – Yes

Conflict tracking:

pacman – Yes

apt-get – Yes

rpm –  Yes

Access to build (compile) enstructions:

pacman – Yes, via ABS

apt-get – Not as far as I know

rpm – As above

Downloads binary:

 pacman – Yes

apt-get – Yes

rpm – Yes

Tracks user created source compiles:

pacman – Yes, via makepkg

apt-get – Yes

rpm – No

Repos must be resonable size (5000+) :

pacman (Archlinux) – Yes

apt-get (Debian) – Definatly

rpm (Fedora) – Yes

Flexible, with various options for things:

pacman – Yes, up to 5 options for install, remove and upgrade, with more non spesific ones.

 apt-get – Yes, though not particularly flexible in my experience

rpm – Yes, though equaly inflexible


What I’m trying to say here is that pacman is the best! Actualy, what I’m saying is that pacman is good, but we must remeber how small in comparison it’s repos are to debians giant repos. It shows that they all do what you want, just some better than others