My favorite is pacman because it is fast af but it has really weird syntax's
My favorite is pacman because it is fast af but it has really weird syntax's
FYI: yay is no longer maintained (Untrue! See response here). Use paru instead Consider paru as an alternative option; it's written in Rust and has better version tracking for *-git packages (won't miss upgrades if the AUR version isn't tracked, won't do pointless upgrades if the AUR version changes but HEAD remains unchanged)
The latest release of yay was 3 weeks ago. Where are you seeing that it's not maintained anymore?
Huh! I appear to have fallen victim to misinformation. I stand corrected and I apologize for not properly confirm such a strong claim before repeating it like that.
I suppose a more accurate way to put it is that yay has been slower to adopt new features (e.g.: yay#336 vs paru#260), but otherwise remains a current and well-maintained piece of software.
I was about to throw my computer out the window when you said that because I literally just implemented a bunch of ansible playbooks using yay to configure my machines and after yogurt et. al. being abandoned, I couldn't take another change. Not yet. I'll check out paru at some point though.
Fellow paru user here - definitely a good choice.
Looks like I made a mistake! I was misinformed about yay being unmaintained. I'm sorry about the misleading comment. I personally like paru, but if you're already using yay there may not actually be any compelling reason for you to switch.
came here to post this.
Also it always feels like I'm cheering for my system. :D
What features does it has what other package manager doesn't have
No one's fielded this yet, so I'll give it a shot.
Portage offers maximum configurability: you can switch optional package features on and off. If a package feature is off, you don't need to install dependencies to support it, so it makes for a slimmer system.
You can upgrade many packages even if the distribution hasn't by copying a single small file to a new name and running two commands.
Similarly, if you're running a new or fringe architecture (like riscv) and want to try to install a package that isn't officially available for it, you can do it fairly simply (minor edit to a text file or additional parameter at the command line). Doesn't always work, but it's still easier than the configure-make-make_install dance, and the dependencies are handled for you.
Portage also supports a bunch of other fringe use cases, like pulling source straight from git and building it. And you can create simple packages by writing <10 lines of text file (well, specialized bash shell script).
On the downside, Portage is S-L-O-W. It has more complicated dependency trees to resolve than other package managers, and installs most packages by building them from source (although this isn't a requirement).
I like it, though.
I used to like portage a lot when I first tried gentoo. I was like dam I really have to build every single thing. I just want this. don't get me wrong Gentoo keeps your system maintained clean and minimal but just the time compiling got my wife angry lol
It's some computing device (technically a smart toaster could do it) that shares the binaries over the network to other machines. Normally stuff is compiled for the lower common denominator when it comes to CPU architecture and supported features.
I have it as a VM, some people do it on bare metal. I'm trying to to have multiple CPU architectures supported by cheating a bit with BTRFS snapshots at the moment; time will tell if it works out.
I'm using pacman with paru right now, but I have to say than installing flatpaks has been a really nice experience on my postmarket-os phone and on desktop as well. I am using Gnome Software to install and run with two clicks, feels very snappy.
I like flatpak because the apps run on all distros!
Portage, of course.
emerge is the command but it's called Portage, ackshually. And yes, it's the best.
My favourite is pacman. I actually like the syntax. It feels very UNIX-y.
I'm a fan of the refresh (-y) and upgrade (-u) options being separate flags that can be used separately or together. I also find pacman's output to be very clean and readable.
Whenever I use apt, I find it slightly annoying that I need to invoke update and upgrade (and dist-upgrade) separately. I also find apt spits out a lot of unnecessary output, resulting in an unreadable wall of text.
I haven't used yum/dnf much, but the few times I used it I was slightly annoyed that it seems to insist on refreshing the repositories every time it runs.
My favorite is pacman (BTW, I really like the syntax), but I'm on openSUSE now so I deal with zypper, which works really well but I'm not a fan of the syntax.
I’d like to put in my 2 cents for pkgsrc
It’s not the sexiest, fastest or most full-featured but having a package manager that can bootstrap on anything even remotely smelling of Unix is awesome. And it sits cleanly next to whatever native package manager may exist.
pkgsrc drew me into NetBSD and becoming an official developer was a proud and happy moment.
Hey, thanks for suggesting pkgsrc! Do you have any experience using it on systems where you don't have root access, i.e. you need to install software in your home directory? Is it a good fit for such scenarios?
Yes! You’ll have to use pkgsrc from source. The bootstrap script has an unprivileged flag.
Chocolaty is superior
I use Linux since 2004 and have a lot of experience with all kinds of different package managers. I use all these actively on different systems right now and I like them best in this order:
flatpak > apk > paru / pacman > portage > apt
Used to prefer portage over everything, but as I got older, with 2 little children, etc. I just don't want to use source-based stuff intensively any more. Nowadays, I prefer to just install my sheit and have it work.
I like apt for its syntax, I like yay for it's speed and ease compared to pacman.
Pacman has absurd option syntax, I think to deliberately make it feel exclusive. If the first thing you need to do is create a bunch of aliases or a crib sheet for basic things then it's a terrible user experience.
apt or pacman. DNF is pretty slow, though.
You will all hate me but... Snaps! First time I could easily roll back a bad version of thunderbird (I use it for work -office 365) which got stuck in a oauth2 login loop. I had to roll back twice (again, single command, everything just worked) then finally an upgrade where the bug was fixed.
Don't get me wrong I've pinned versions before with apt etc, but I always end up forgetting and having to remove them afterwards.
And... The only reason I was using the thunderbird snap was cause the regular apt thunderbird had some other annoying bug.
Yep.... Snaps... (Shake my head and walk away)
Kubuntu comes with Apt, and from time to time I use Nala too.
I love dnf just for its search function, I literally cannot use apt to search for packages its so much worse than dnf in that regard.
Dnf searches take so long to run though, whereas pacman is near instant. When I moved to fedora, I seriously miss the speed of pacman
Speed is lacking, but it always gets me the results I want. I used Arch for a short time but don't remember the experience searching for packages. (I also really liked Arch's way of naming packages)
@sh.itjust.works
This is a community that is only for nerds jk. everyone who doesn't scare when seeing UNIX terminal welcome! rules:
go to feed...
@sh.itjust.works
This is a community that is only for nerds jk. everyone who doesn't scare when seeing UNIX terminal welcome! rules:
go to feed...
Debian user here, I just use apt. Really easy to use. I don't really think about being fond of a certain package manager, if it works, it works.
save