What is your preferred Linux Package Management System?
Linux - GeneralThis Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
View Poll Results: What is your preferred Linux Package Management System?
Distribution: Debian, Red Hat, Slackware, Fedora, Ubuntu
Posts: 13,602
Rep:
What is your preferred Linux Package Management System?
Based on feedback in this thread, the official LQ polls continue. What is your preferred Package Manager? I understand the line for these is a little blurred, so if you have suggestions for improvements or additions, let us know.
Although Slackware is my preferred distro and I use its package tools quite happily, I have to say that aptitude/apt-get/Synaptic is one impressive piece of work.
I have a somewhat different view of the various "Software Centers" that are built on it. They seem to be more marketing than management.
FPM is 'effing package manager' which might fit your criteria for package management, which is an up and comer in the ranks, if you are interested in adding it.
And pkg_add is the bsd's ports package management system, if you are interested in adding it.
Elsewise,. this is a HUGE toss up for me, and isn't as easy as picking one or the other.
For everyday binary package management I would say that 'yum' is by far my favorite. It's easy to use, read and understand even for beginners. It also has tons of extensions to play with, some of which are left out of (or harder to find) in the APT/dpkg pm's.
For source installation, 'pkg_add' is hands down my favorite. I like it even more than portage, which is saying a lot for me.
Now on the other side of the coin, as far as making packages? 'fpm' is the only option AFAIAC. It's really a game changer. Here is the link if you need convincing: https://github.com/jordansissel/fpm
TL;DR:
Yum for binary packages
bsd's pkg_add for source
'fpm' for making packages
Least favorite you ask?
Pacman. If you have to have two seperate package managers for your distro (pacman and yaourt or some other AUR package manager) then you are doing it wrong. Pick one or the other. Don't make us BUILD another pm to use the community packages. Just add a 'community' repository like EVERYONE ELSE DOES..
Last edited by szboardstretcher; 09-15-2014 at 09:47 PM.
Paludis' (http://paludis.exherbo.org/) package format on Exherbo is quite nice. I picked Portage since that's as close as I could get. I highly recommend people look into some of Exherbo's ideas -- they're all improvements on things Gentoo has done poorly.
Distribution: Debian Wheezy, Jessie, Sid/Experimental, playing with LFS.
Posts: 2,900
Rep:
DPKG/Apt is my preferred package management system for ease of use and for it's built in abilities.
Having used Slackware I have come to the conclusion that if you're going to have a minimalist package management system, in other words let the user sort out dependencies etc, then why even have a package management system. Because of that I am now working through LFS for myself but will remain a firm dpkg/apt user for regular package management system for friends, family, customers etc.
It would be nice, again, to be able to pick more than one but only because I think self compiling should be on the list and I would select it as well as dpkg/apt if I could.
Jeremy, in my understanding the items listed are package management tools rather than package management systems, and in my opinion the design of such a system as a whole is what matters most.
Let's take the example of the tools I know the best in the list: pkgtools and slackpkg. Both tools are used in the context of the Slackware Package Management System, and are used to manage the most important feature of the system: the packages' database, in this case made of collection of text files. Furthermore slackpkg adds features to pkgtools but rely on it for the basic actions.
To shorten a long story and as a happy Slacker I of course vote for Slackware's Package Management System.
As a side note, "make" that was just proposed could have been worded "No Package Management System". That's of course possible, but put all the burden of maintaining each individual file in the system on the shoulder of its user(s). Not for me
PS I really don't see the usefulness of this thread. I won't blame anyone but me for that feeling though: I just should have refrained of posting here.
Last edited by Didier Spaier; 09-16-2014 at 02:57 PM.
Reason: PS added.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.