package management stinks

[anikin]

Does this new distro have a package manager that works "out of the box" ?

Yes, it does. It handles packages exactly the same way as Debian and Ubuntu, that is reliably and user friendly manner.

[Ether]

Does this new distro have a package manager that works "out of the box" ?

Yes, it does. It handles packages exactly the same way as Debian and Ubuntu, that is reliably and user friendly manner.

I'm a bit out of my league here, but I just read the following post located at
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/posting.ph ... e&p=601023 :

sickgut
Joined: 23 Mar 2010
Posts: 1157
Location: Tasmania, Australia in the mountains.

Posted: Tue 31 Jan 2012, 12:45

The only reason Puppy cant run other distros packages well is because of the extremely stripped down kernel. As soon as you try to install a package that relies on stuff that should really be in a linux kernel that puppy doesnt have then it wont work.

...

The only clear answer as i have discovered is to start with a more compatible base. There is no point in trying to retro fit another OSes packages on top of Puppy.

it doesnt matter if you have fitted apt-get or synaptic or whatever to puppy, the package manager isnt the issue the issue is that the puppy base itself isnt compatible with the packages you will wish to install.

Does this new distro address that problem?

.

[Semme]

Rescue's fine. You want the full Monty.. well, you better be willing to sink yer teeth in.

Pup's environment is outstanding. But, don't expect to tap the cli and have an extra five hundred and fifty megs worth of libs @ your fingertips. The other guys are somewhat more functional as desktops because of all those steenking libs! Pup ain't perfect, but neither are the other guys. For me, and most, it boils down to hw recognition.

As far as deps, Deb and Ubuntu are virtually identical. While Pup lacks the internals of either, he certainly shines when it comes to placing the user in the drivers seat. Needless to say, all three communities are loaded with top-notch support.

[anikin]

Ether,
Debian Dog is 100 % Debian under the hood. It uses the same kernel and the same package management system. Discussing theoretical issues is one thing, but you first need to touch the bare metal with your own hands. Just start using it and you'll be pleasantly surprised.

[Ether]

Ether,
Debian Dog is 100 % Debian under the hood. It uses the same kernel and the same package management system. Discussing theoretical issues is one thing, but you first need to touch the bare metal with your own hands. Just start using it and you'll be pleasantly surprised.

I'm new at this Linux stuff. At this point I don't have the discernment to tell for sure what's correct and what's not.

When I read the post quoted above by "sickgut" it seemed to make sense to me. I was just wondering if the point he was making was a valid one. And if so, was his concern addressed in this new distro.

By the way, to me "bare metal" means writing production hard-real-time code for embedded processors which are not running an OS. Something I did a lot of in an earlier epoch of my life.

I am very much interested in learning Linux, but I am not interested in drinking from a fire hose. I need a Linux installation which just runs out of the box, and has hassle-free simple noob installation of the apps I need to do my work, so I can learn Linux without a gun to my head while using the system to get my work done.

I'm asking here about Puppy because I want to make the transition from Windoze to Linux, and I have been so impressed by Puppy over the past 5 years or so that I have been using it as one tool in my toolbox. If I can get a Puppy distro that reliably supports simple installation of the apps I need, I would prefer to go that route.

I spent 5 fruitless hours yesterday trying to get an app from the Ubuntu repo to install and work on a Puppy Precise 5.7.1 installation. I came to this forum looking for friendly and helpful advice before I reluctantly declare defeat and move on.

People are different and learn in different ways. Asking questions of people who are knowledgeable and patient and eager to share what they know is what works best for me. In return I participate in other technical forums where I am the teacher instead of the noob student.

So... to any knowledgeable persons out there who are willing to engage my questions I will be indebted to you.

.

[cimarron]

I started into linux with Ubuntu, which is one of the easiest and most refined distros. It's changed a lot recently, and I would probably suggest Linux Mint now to start (it's based on Ubuntu and uses the well-maintained Ubuntu repositories). Package management is done well in both and updates are automatic.

I love Puppy linux, but I wouldn't recommend it for linux beginners. It's great to learn linux in depth, as its code is simpler and accessible (and you're forced to learn more to get some things to work). I can tweak code in Puppy that is way too complex in Ubuntu. That means I can make it my own more, a unique OS that I really feel at home in. Plus Puppy can bring back old equipment from the dead, and it's completely portable. But I found my way here through experimenting first with more developed and refined distros, like Ubuntu or Mint.

[Ether]

I started into linux with Ubuntu, which is one of the easiest and most refined distros. It's changed a lot recently, and I would probably suggest Linux Mint now to start (it's based on Ubuntu and uses the well-supported Ubuntu repositories). Package management is done well in both and updates are automatic.... I found my way here through experimenting first with more developed and refined distros, like Ubuntu or Mint.

Thanks for that insight.

I guess I was inclined to stay with Puppy because I've had such a positive experience with it these past 5 years. But perhaps for my new use-case it is not the right fit and I am expecting too much.

.

[saintless]

Hi, Ether.

When I read the post quoted above by "sickgut" it seemed to make sense to me. I was just wondering if the point he was making was a valid one. And if so, was his concern addressed in this new distro.

No, Sickgut's post about stripped kernel in puppy has nothing to do with DebianDog. Infact DebianDog is a product from Sickgut's ideas.
DebianDog is Official Debian Stable (Wheezy) Live CD made to look more or less like puppy. The kernel is untouched Debian Wheezy one. The Structure is untouched. In short DebianDog is Debian Wheezy with options to load SFS files and remaster the system similar to puppy method and option to make frugal or full install.

I spent 5 fruitless hours yesterday trying to get an app from the Ubuntu repo to install and work on a Puppy Precise 5.7.1 installation. I came to this forum looking for friendly and helpful advice before I reluctantly declare defeat and move on.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I guess this is the application you mention: python-cvxopt?
Open terminal in DebianDog and type:

Code: Select all

apt-get update

Code: Select all

root@debian:~# apt-get install python-cvxopt
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree       
Reading state information... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
  libatlas3gf-base libdsdp-5.8gf libfftw3-3 libglpk0 libgmp10 libgomp1
  libgsl0ldbl libltdl7 libsqlite3-0 python python-minimal python2.7
  python2.7-minimal
Suggested packages:
  libfftw3-bin libfftw3-dev libiodbc2-dev libmysqlclient-dev gsl-ref-psdoc
  gsl-doc-pdf gsl-doc-info gsl-ref-html python-doc python-tk python2.7-doc
  binutils binfmt-support
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  libatlas3gf-base libdsdp-5.8gf libfftw3-3 libglpk0 libgmp10 libgomp1
  libgsl0ldbl libltdl7 libsqlite3-0 python python-cvxopt python-minimal
  python2.7 python2.7-minimal
0 upgraded, 14 newly installed, 0 to remove and 30 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/10.9 MB of archives.
After this operation, 30.9 MB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? 

Confirm the installation. You can also use GUI Synaptic package manager to download and install software from official Debian repository.

Hope this helps.

Toni

[Ether]

Hope this helps.

It is very helpful.

Thank you for that detailed articulate answer.

I'm going to give it a try.

.

[rufwoof]

..
I've used various Puppy versions "as-is" for the past 5 years, mostly for rescue. Most have worked flawlessly. Amazing.

Now I'm at the point where I'd like to leave Windows behind and start using Linux full time.

To do this I would need to install software apps.

I made made an appeal for help here, but after doing a lot more reading I've very reluctantly come to the conclusion that if I want hassle-free installation of software apps I am going to have to "graduate" from Puppy to a mainstream full Linux installation.

I'll bet this is what happens to a lot of new users.

Cold shiver at the thought of a - FULL INSTALL !!! - no thanks. Puppy is the ultimate LiveCD IMO. Its one of the few that can actually be used in LiveCD mode in practice. From power on to desktop fully loaded with spreadsheets, word processor, browser, video editor ...etc in 2 or 3 minutes. And with no lag thereafter (all running in memory).

Make a mistake and a reboot has you back to a fresh working version.

No savefile or frugal required - although the option is always there if you need it. My LiveCD puppy is minimal - basic desktop, notepad (leafpad), a calculator (galculator), MT Paint and XPaint, together with the usual desktop stuff (mplayer, CD/DVD load, rip, burn, author etc). Usual desktop admin tools and network connect/firewall etc stuff.

Banking - boot, grab a factory fresh browser and all running from CD/Memory - low/no risk of a virus (provided of course you surf nowhere else before or after).

Office - ditto, but load LibreOffice SFS. Ditto for other tools (for video editing stuff I have a SFS that loads inkscape, audacity, xvidcap, blender, openshot).

For persistence, rather than a savefile - that can fill up at the worst possible time, I just drag the relevant sub directory from /root to HDD using ROX and select move, then drag that back again and select symbolic link. Then next reboot just replace the /root subdirectory with another symbolic link again (in practice I use a script to make several of such rearrangements all automated via a single mouse click). That way my personal storage space is always all of available memory plus some (1.7GB in my case).

I tried savefile/frugal's - didn't like them. Full installs - had enough of managing recovering those back to 'how it was before' under windows. LiveCD - absolutely great IMO - yet new users seem to want to skip over that option asap, and in so doing miss out on one off (if not the best) aspects of Puppy.

Try running one of the other distro's as LiveCD's. Often they're painfully/unacceptably slow.

For me, PPM isn't even required, I haven't even updated its database. I'll try PET's, SFS's galore - and have found that some from other distro's even work ok - but if not a reboot undoes things. Mostly however I just use the LiveCD in banking mode (no HDD's mounted) or in Office mode (HDD's mounted and a script run to load my usual SFS's and set up the relevant symbolic links for persistence).

My original intent back in early March as a new Puppy user was to create a LiveCD just for banking purposes, remove the CD and boot into XP boot for other more general stuff. In practice I haven't booted XP for over a month now - and not missing it either. Puppy takes care of all my surfing and low level calculating, writing stuff (firefox, galculator, leafpad), and office stuff (Libre), and audio, video watching/editing stuff. Is safe, needs no antivirus updates, and doesn't even need updating if the particular choice of existing SFS's are working well enough already. And I get to choose when to update, unlike my son whose windows desktop totally changed and left him with several hours of recovering/effort after MS decided that he should have a automatic update installed at a time chosen by them.

[saintless]

Cold shiver at the thought of a - FULL INSTALL !!! - no thanks.

Not at all.
Having well supported and working package manager like Debian one does not mean you need to make Full install. It just means the SFS files you use can be made from non experience user much faster even without using save file but only from programs downloaded in RAM.
You can use good package manager with frugal install in a very productive way.
Package manager is not something we can live without. It is something that makes new users to love linux.

Toni

[slavvo67]

Trusty Tahr handles the repositories quite nicely.

[Ether]

Hope this helps.

It is very helpful.

Thank you for that detailed articulate answer.

I'm going to give it a try.

I just downloaded and booted it. WOW.

It did exactly what you said it would do. All I had to do was type the apt-get commands you showed me. Seeing the messages scrolling on the screen as the commands did their thing has now given me insight into what this package manager stuff is all about. It's starting to make a lot of sense.

apt-get successfully downloaded and installed python, and the newly-installed python correctly solved a large linear algebra problem with no errors.

You guys are amazing.

I know the following question is going to sound like the answer should be obvious, but I'd like to know: Is there some way I can save this python installation I've downloaded so I don't have to download it again? I ask because I booted from the LiveCD and have not frugal-installed yet and there is no personal save file yet. I left the Debian Dog machine running in case there is a simple way to save it before I shut it down.

Thanks for your help.

.

[saintless]

Hi, Ether.
the answer is here:
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 32b#773250

[john biles]

Nothing beats a modern day package manager like apt-get or yum.
Linux is about choice.
If you don't want to fiddle use Ubuntu / Fedora chose what you want and install it. Computer too slow? Use Lubuntu / Xubuntu I have a 2002 era Pentium 4 running Xubuntu 14.04 just fine.

Over the years on this forum the thing I've discovered is longterm forum members are fiddlers. They seem to spend more time fiddling then using their computers like I do. They get a kick out of getting Puppy to do something it didn't do before. While their having their fun, poor users coming over from Windows or Ubuntu are wanting to use it ,not develop it and that's when the problems start.

Puppy by its nature wants you to fiddle with it, learn how it works and that is what makes it Puppy.

The infrastructure needed to manage, test and maintain a repository of Applications needed specifically for Puppy to bring it up to a Ubuntu standard would require lots of people and $$$$$ and this is the problem. Someone writing a package manager on its own won't fix the problem.

Legacy OS doesn't use a package manager for extra packages I create for it. I create a tar.gz package for applications which only allows that application to be unzipped in to Legacy's file system. Once it's there it can only be removed manually by deleting it bit by bit.

I try and make the default install of Legacy as feature rich as I can so 95% of users won't have to search and install anything extra.

[mavrothal]

The infrastructure needed to manage, test and maintain a repository of Applications needed specifically for Puppy to bring it up to a Ubuntu standard would require lots of people and $$$$$ and this is the problem. Someone writing a package manager on its own won't fix the problem.

Dead on.
For quite some time I also thought that PPM is the problem but is not (though can still be improved).
Try to get apt-get or rpm or pacman or... to install every conceivable package from any official or unofficial source or alien repo and then let me know how do they do as package managers compared to PPM
The correct answer is to have carefully build and controlled repos (remember Saluki?) and then a package manager that makes it really hard to install anything that is not from these repos!
But then you do not have puppy but yet another debian/arch/fedora spin with the endless cascading dependencies and strict control. Try to bypass these and sooner or latter run into the same troubles. Unless you have a quality assurance team, a farm of machines and setups, an automatic testing suite and few hundreds/thousands alpha testers ie "people and $$$$$" (all "major" distros have these). But is it going to still be puppy?

[battleshooter]

The infrastructure needed to manage, test and maintain a repository of Applications needed specifically for Puppy to bring it up to a Ubuntu standard would require lots of people and $$$$$ and this is the problem

The correct answer is to have carefully build and controlled repos (remember Saluki?)

I wouldn't mind being a Puppy package developer or whatever you call the invisible army that compiles the Ubuntu repos. But at this stage I can't even decide if Slacko, Precise, or Tahr is the flagship at the moment. If the answer is all 3 I don't think I'd be keen to compile the same package 3 times, not impossible, but the uploading would be tricking for me as I am on limited internet.