Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora 18 Will Preview A New Package Manager

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Yumex sucks. Apper should be the default package manager. But i wish the yum backed for apper could be better,faster. The pacman backed for Archlinux is really fast.

    Ratings and screenshots for apps is a nice feature that should be implemented in Fedora

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
      All of your points apply equally well to the systems used by debian/ubuntu.
      Not exactly:
      1) Their package manager works faster.
      2) It does not getting OOM on 128Mb machines, ever.
      3) They don't have to download some strange binary sql databases just to do things in reasonable time.

      There is no perfect things in this world. But some things are better than others. When it comes to comparison, yum suxx.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by mark45 View Post
        So I don't know why Ubuntu's updates work while F17's updates break my x64 setup: Core i5, GeForce GTX 560Ti - nothing weird nor fancy
        You don't give much to go on (and no, "nothing weird nor fancy" doesn't cut it). Did you use a custom disk layout? Existing partitions (including MBR)? Multi-boot? Clean install or upgrade?

        There's lot's of stuff to be wary about with Fedora releases, which are Red Hat's testing branch (by their own admission).

        If you want the rock-solid experience, go with RHEL (or one of the clones) instead.

        Or stick with ubuntu.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
          I am really considering fedora at the moment as a replacement for ubuntu ^^ but when I read that stuff here I get frustrated ^^. I want a good gnome-shell distribution, I think fedora is the best in this way if you like the normal gnome-shell and want the true gnome-feeling ^^.

          I tried also arch linux but I had problems to install stuff that was experimental what under ubuntu with a ppa did work without problems at the same time. So I am a bit between the chairs right now, I dont like rpm and I think I will not like yum much ^^ so I thought no problem, just use the gui thing, I dont need a softwarecenter with preview images and stars and stuff, but if you say that crashes very often, that is not good in that point. ^^

          pfff really hard days for gnome(shell) users. using always ppas sucks and have old totem versions and stuff because of unity sucks too. gentoo is not got any better than 5-10 years ago only that it has newer programm packages ^^, arch seems also not totaly good usable because there are earlier packages that work in ppas than you get problemles working packages für AUR.

          Debian also sucks when you want the newest gnome-shell ^^ maybe linux mint? but to get it to make it a normal clean gnome-shell its also some work you have to do, because its basicly the distro for people who hate kde, gnome-shell (pure) and unity ^^ basicly for gnome2-lovers that need support to make gnome3 look more like gnome2 or something like that.

          It really sucks for gnome-shell users today.
          I think you don't know what these things are.
          RPM is just a package manager (check, install, remove, etc.) -- roughly equivalent to DPKG.
          Using the 'rpm' command to directly install a package is a losing proposition, in much the same way as using dpkg for the same. Here you get into stupid crap like multi-layered dependencies, circular dependencies, etc.

          YUM is a FRONT END to RPM -- roughly equivalent to APT, which is a FRONT END to DPKG.
          Yum is used to install a package, either locally, or from a remote repository, while verifying and resolving all levels of dependencies, including circular.
          ** they do approximately the same thing.
          apt-get install == yum install
          etc.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by 0xBADCODE View Post
            Not exactly:
            1) Their package manager works faster.
            No it doesn't. Performance limitations are by network and disk write performance, and yum will hit those limits just fine. You can't violate the network or disk by using super magic sauce.

            2) It does not getting OOM on 128Mb machines, ever.
            Everything can run out of memory. EVERYTHING. No exception. And FYI: I've used yum quite successfully on systems with only 64 MB, maybe even 32, though that might not even boot a modern kernel. I suggest that you don't forget to enable swap. There should be no memory problems.

            3) They don't have to download some strange binary sql databases just to do things in reasonable time.
            Huh? Well if apt just goes through a blob mess of packages, that must make it EXTREMELY slow.... in fact, this would directly contradict your first point! Guaranteed!

            There is no perfect things in this world. But some things are better than others. When it comes to comparison, yum suxx.
            And when trying to compare similar things fairly, YOU "suxx". You've got a bunch of preconceptions and are bring it out in an ignorant puke of worthless contradictions.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
              I think you don't know what these things are.
              I know its not my fault that they use the same name for the format (rpm) as for the programm rpm in debian its clear when I talk about the format or the programm. so I meant the format not the rpm command. and even the programm because what is basicly yum or apt, they are databases and some kind of a loop of dpkg commands or over rpm commands. so your yum will call 100 times rpm -i .... if you install a programm with 99 dependencies.


              But on the rpm side you used to use that program much more often because a concept like ppa was not very common, today maybe yum does a good job, yes. but then again I hear here that it sucks more than debian even in speed and mem-usage, I dont like the file-dependency crap also not I think package dependencies is the way to go.

              Ok I see that file dependencies are only optional at least today? but even the posibility to do such stupid shit, sucks, because somebody could come to the idea to do that, then you become such crap package and have problems with it.

              So shure, its not the big problem anymore I guess. But in earlier times there was a big problem that there was 3-4 rpm based distros (suse, fedora/redhat, mandrake) and it got mixed very hard what did cause many problems. in Ubuntu and in debian it is prette clear, dont use that its even nearly impossible to do that, in ubuntu there is also a clearer hirarchy you have debian the big dady of all, then there is ubuntu and you have many ubuntu-meta-distributions so its very clear what works and what not...

              so ok we dont have to follow that stuff more, basicly I said that I dont like maybe today less factbased than in the past and more of a bad feeling deb more than rpm (formats). Redhat/fedora thought longer and maybe even today that rpm should be shared as packages between different distributions, and I dont agree to that. Most of the time that causes big problems, and I cant think of problems between dependencies on a debian/ubuntu system but I remember searching libxy.rpm files and try which one could work or so... that just sucks. I know its more a problem of the past but it was there. And I am used 10 years of debian/ubuntu using, and maybe a bit gentoo what is also more from the directory structure like a debian than a redhat... so I am at least a bit uncomfortable in switching to the other side of the power ^^

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
                I know its not my fault that they use the same name for the format (rpm) as for the programm rpm in debian its clear when I talk about the format or the programm. so I meant the format not the rpm command. and even the programm because what is basicly yum or apt, they are databases and some kind of a loop of dpkg commands or over rpm commands. so your yum will call 100 times rpm -i .... if you install a programm with 99 dependencies.


                But on the rpm side you used to use that program much more often because a concept like ppa was not very common, today maybe yum does a good job, yes. but then again I hear here that it sucks more than debian even in speed and mem-usage, I dont like the file-dependency crap also not I think package dependencies is the way to go.

                Ok I see that file dependencies are only optional at least today? but even the posibility to do such stupid shit, sucks, because somebody could come to the idea to do that, then you become such crap package and have problems with it.

                So shure, its not the big problem anymore I guess. But in earlier times there was a big problem that there was 3-4 rpm based distros (suse, fedora/redhat, mandrake) and it got mixed very hard what did cause many problems. in Ubuntu and in debian it is prette clear, dont use that its even nearly impossible to do that, in ubuntu there is also a clearer hirarchy you have debian the big dady of all, then there is ubuntu and you have many ubuntu-meta-distributions so its very clear what works and what not...

                so ok we dont have to follow that stuff more, basicly I said that I dont like maybe today less factbased than in the past and more of a bad feeling deb more than rpm (formats). Redhat/fedora thought longer and maybe even today that rpm should be shared as packages between different distributions, and I dont agree to that. Most of the time that causes big problems, and I cant think of problems between dependencies on a debian/ubuntu system but I remember searching libxy.rpm files and try which one could work or so... that just sucks. I know its more a problem of the past but it was there. And I am used 10 years of debian/ubuntu using, and maybe a bit gentoo what is also more from the directory structure like a debian than a redhat... so I am at least a bit uncomfortable in switching to the other side of the power ^^

                RPM based distros did used to have issues, but I can assure you its not true today. On my machines yum from the command line seems to install applications as quickly as apt-get, and I haven't noticed any performance or dependency issues at all. Arch's pacman is faster than them both anyway

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
                  I know its not my fault that they use the same name for the format (rpm) as for the programm rpm in debian its clear when I talk about the format or the programm. so I meant the format not the rpm command. and even the programm because what is basicly yum or apt, they are databases and some kind of a loop of dpkg commands or over rpm commands. so your yum will call 100 times rpm -i .... if you install a programm with 99 dependencies.
                  Formats are just format. package.rpm is clear enough. apt-get can also call dpkg install many times. What is so different?

                  But on the rpm side you used to use that program much more often because a concept like ppa was not very common, today maybe yum does a good job, yes. but then again I hear here that it sucks more than debian even in speed and mem-usage, I dont like the file-dependency crap also not I think package dependencies is the way to go.
                  It seems you do not know what you are talking about. Before pushing further assumption, please review about the functionality of a package manager like yum or apt. It is all about configuration. Fedora has more agressive update than Ubuntu which inherited Debian conservative approach.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by mark45 View Post
                    I don't know - maybe before sending updates the folks at Canonical test them on a wide(r) range of hw, ask them about such details, have you?, they might be kind enough to actually tell your team some better or new ideas. Just saying.
                    They do indeed. In fact, most of their updates likely get tested by millions of Fedora users, before Canonical ever sends them out to their own users.

                    While more/better testing is always welcome, I'm afraid that's just the price you have to pay sometimes when using a bleeding-edge distro. The entire purpose of Fedora is to make those early tests, so that others can see how they go when deployed to a large audience of users/hardware, and if that's not your cup of tea then Ubuntu is probably the better choice for you.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by finalzone View Post
                      Formats are just format. package.rpm is clear enough. apt-get can also call dpkg install many times. What is so different?
                      I just wanted to say that if rpm (as programm sucks) thats also a problem of yum... that was my point, and if dpkg would suck, then apt would also have problems.

                      so to say yum is not rpm (programm) and therefor when I say rpm sucks does not matter because yum != rpm is not true...

                      Originally posted by finalzone View Post
                      It seems you do not know what you are talking about. Before pushing further assumption, please review about the functionality of a package manager like yum or apt. It is all about configuration. Fedora has more agressive update than Ubuntu which inherited Debian conservative approach.
                      for that I could strangle you like homer does bart ^^. You can have a different opinion than mine, no problem with that, but to say without any proof or any anything to say you dont understand what you are talking about (and therefore you are not allowed to have a opinion sucks, and is just a lie).
                      The commend between my last and yours did agree to my point (that rpm had (big) issues) that was my point, not more not less. But also its true that rpm allowes file-dependencies, I thinkt thats very dangerous and some murrons will use that, that would cause problems.

                      So maybe you have the oposite opinion than I do, thats your right, but dont say to me that I dont know what I am talking about just because you dont get my point.

                      (sorry for that aggressiv tone, but if you have 10-15 years of experince with linux use it for nearly all, I have even made own deb packages, and did write some small gentoo install-scripts) used (shurly not the last few years but before that) a bit suse, more mandrake and stuff, so I have a (small) clue what I am talking about and I think I know enough to at least have a own opinion to that topic)

                      BACK TO FEDORA

                      back to fedora testet it, not so bad, packaging wasnt the problem, what was problem was that I could not use my ubuntu home, so I needed to use a selinux command (I did not select it in the installer but replaced it later manually) thats a bit confusing surely a better error could come that just not allowed to change directory to my home dir when I try to login...

                      But ok, solved... now I have a bigger problem I think its only a problem of pulseaudio or the usb-driver of my usb-soundcard, under linux that works without problems, in fedora I tried it at the moment only with minitube, will try it with other sourced but at the beginning it works that some dmest usb-errors pop up and it stops working and nearly freezes my desktop ^^ So you will not fix it here, just wanted to give a bit a feedback to my experince ^^ its a U-Control UCA202 usb-soundcard btw....

                      else I had no issues with yum, oh yes chromium is very old version that also crashes very often which I had from a "stable" repo what I installed like descriped here:

                      http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Chromium (so the semi-official package) ^^ thats a bit sad.

                      else than that I had no problem ohh ok the installed said that It could not install grub and then the old ubuntu grub was still there, so I had to mount the lvm partition under ubuntu and then update-grub found it and added it. (without the nice grafical boot, instead oldschool text-scroll-boot ^^ but it boots so good enough ^^)

                      I the case somebody is interested in my experience ^^

                      And btw, when the stable chromium package is buggy and very old (crashed in 10 minutes like 5 times) as the ubuntu (stable) chromium package is stable there should maybe be a current unstable package but the last unstable package is for fedora 15 and is a year old... so at least dont link to that package in the wiki I tried to install that and removed the package only to find out that there was no newer package anyway and I have to reinstall the old "stable" one...
                      Last edited by blackiwid; 06-20-2012, 08:05 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
                        I just wanted to say that if rpm (as programm sucks) thats also a problem of yum... that was my point, and if dpkg would suck, then apt would also have problems.

                        so to say yum is not rpm (programm) and therefor when I say rpm sucks does not matter because yum != rpm is not true...



                        for that I could strangle you like homer does bart ^^. You can have a different opinion than mine, no problem with that, but to say without any proof or any anything to say you dont understand what you are talking about (and therefore you are not allowed to have a opinion sucks, and is just a lie).
                        The commend between my last and yours did agree to my point (that rpm had (big) issues) that was my point, not more not less. But also its true that rpm allowes file-dependencies, I thinkt thats very dangerous and some murrons will use that, that would cause problems.

                        So maybe you have the oposite opinion than I do, thats your right, but dont say to me that I dont know what I am talking about just because you dont get my point.

                        (sorry for that aggressiv tone, but if you have 10-15 years of experince with linux use it for nearly all, I have even made own deb packages, and did write some small gentoo install-scripts) used (shurly not the last few years but before that) a bit suse, more mandrake and stuff, so I have a (small) clue what I am talking about and I think I know enough to at least have a own opinion to that topic)

                        BACK TO FEDORA

                        back to fedora testet it, not so bad, packaging wasnt the problem, what was problem was that I could not use my ubuntu home, so I needed to use a selinux command (I did not select it in the installer but replaced it later manually) thats a bit confusing surely a better error could come that just not allowed to change directory to my home dir when I try to login...

                        But ok, solved... now I have a bigger problem I think its only a problem of pulseaudio or the usb-driver of my usb-soundcard, under linux that works without problems, in fedora I tried it at the moment only with minitube, will try it with other sourced but at the beginning it works that some dmest usb-errors pop up and it stops working and nearly freezes my desktop ^^ So you will not fix it here, just wanted to give a bit a feedback to my experince ^^ its a U-Control UCA202 usb-soundcard btw....

                        else I had no issues with yum, oh yes chromium is very old version that also crashes very often which I had from a "stable" repo what I installed like descriped here:

                        http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Chromium (so the semi-official package) ^^ thats a bit sad.

                        else than that I had no problem ohh ok the installed said that It could not install grub and then the old ubuntu grub was still there, so I had to mount the lvm partition under ubuntu and then update-grub found it and added it. (without the nice grafical boot, instead oldschool text-scroll-boot ^^ but it boots so good enough ^^)

                        I the case somebody is interested in my experience ^^

                        And btw, when the stable chromium package is buggy and very old (crashed in 10 minutes like 5 times) as the ubuntu (stable) chromium package is stable there should maybe be a current unstable package but the last unstable package is for fedora 15 and is a year old... so at least dont link to that package in the wiki I tried to install that and removed the package only to find out that there was no newer package anyway and I have to reinstall the old "stable" one...
                        I just install the google chrome rpm straight from google... automatically adds google's repos and keeps it totally up to date.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
                          I just install the google chrome rpm straight from google... automatically adds google's repos and keeps it totally up to date.
                          ok that seems to be a good workaround... but then at least fedora should link to this, I am used to install my stuff only from a community repos + normal repo... in 99,9% of the times ^^

                          So ok thanks for that one less problem.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by AdamW View Post
                            tl;dr summary: there is a perfectly good reason there are a lot of updates on the day of a Fedora release. It's because of a process that's been standard in the software industry for bleeding decades. It is not, shockingly enough, because a major distribution community backed by a billion-dollar software company is staffed entirely by drooling imbeciles. I realize it's hard to accept, but believe it or not, most of us actually know what the fuck we're doing most of the time.

                            Sorry to be so sarcastic, but seriously. Yeesh.
                            Really now? Can't you just take a hint from the debian process? Freeze the damn thing and only let stuff through after the maintainers have neatly argued the case and provided a nice clean diff? If not, then don't let the update through.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
                              I just wanted to say that if rpm (as programm sucks) thats also a problem of yum... that was my point, and if dpkg would suck, then apt would also have problems.

                              so to say yum is not rpm (programm) and therefor when I say rpm sucks does not matter because yum != rpm is not true...



                              for that I could strangle you like homer does bart ^^. You can have a different opinion than mine, no problem with that, but to say without any proof or any anything to say you dont understand what you are talking about (and therefore you are not allowed to have a opinion sucks, and is just a lie).
                              The commend between my last and yours did agree to my point (that rpm had (big) issues) that was my point, not more not less. But also its true that rpm allowes file-dependencies, I thinkt thats very dangerous and some murrons will use that, that would cause problems.

                              I cut out a bit of your rant that didn't seem to be related to the topic.

                              I don't see what your problem with the rpm system (program) is. You say that it "sucks", but you don't give any rational reason WHY. The typical problems in the past with installation of rpm packages (using the rpm program) was as I described previously -- missing or circular dependencies. In other words, the rpm command would fail because the rpm package had dependencies that didn't exist. This wasn't always fun or easy, but it wasn't a failure or defect in the program itself. The program was intended to ABORT when dependencies were missing -- this is correct and necessary behavior.

                              Now if the program depended on something that wasn't present, but RPM didn't recognize that this dependency wasn't present, that is actually a failure in the rpm PACKAGE, not the rpm PROGRAM. These failures are basically the same thing as code bugs. You can install a program that simply does not work -- there is no way for the package manager to check the code and verify that the program isn't a worthless heap of garbage, so I will state that this failure mode is not a failure in rpm at all. Further, it is a failure common to dpkg packages.

                              The resolvable dependencies is where YUM comes into play. Because yum can resolve layered dependencies and install everything required. Obviously, this doesn't help with defective RPMs, but it certainly and absolutely corrects the problem of circular or missing dependencies. Under the condition of circular dependencies, rpm has a mode for sequential installation if that overseer takes on the role of dependency management.


                              Now here is the thing. You also haven't given any kind of explanation as to why you think that dpkg is any better or different than RPM. dpkg does exactly the same thing; it contains a list of dependencies, it contains a bunch of files, it contains a bunch of scripts. The dpkg program takes the deb package, which is practically the same thing as an rpm package, confirms its dependencies, runs scripts, copies files, and exits. It also aborts when discrepancies are found, just like rpm does. It has the same failures and same failure modes as rpm does.


                              You see, your problem/misconception, is that each individual part of the puzzle should be equipped to solve the entire problem all by itself. RPM does NOT "suck". It simply doesn't perform the entire job that you are demanding of it. Along with yum, however, the entire job IS performed.

                              RPM is not a command that you would normally call direct. If you do, you're asking for problems, because there could be a thousand dependencies to install one program, or there could be a thousand packages that depend on a package you're trying to remove or upgrade. You aren't equipped to track all those by yourself. Yum is. RPM doesn't have "big issues". RPM does a specific job, and does it extremely well.

                              Instead, you use the FRONTEND, yum. If you want to install a package, you "yum install ...." or "yum localinstall file.rpm". It will track down the dependencies, prompt you to make sure you want to install them all, and do so. You want to remove a package, yum will track down all the packages that depend on that package, and prompt you if you wish to uninstall them ALL.


                              Imagine, for a moment; in your driveway, there is, sitting on the ground, an engine. You want to go for a drive, and mess around with the engine for a while before deciding that there is no frame, body, seat, steering wheel, etc. --> you can't operate that engine by itself as a motor vehicle on the road. Does the engine suck because you can't drive it on the road without it being part of a car? Of course not! Add all the missing pieces and THEN you will have a working system. This is where your problem is with RPM --> You are expecting something unreasonable out of it. Something it was never intended to do.



                              Now I also have some concern over your complaint regarding file dependencies. As you've mentioned, RPM supports both file AND PACKAGE dependencies. You are complaining about people being stupid and using file dependencies where not appropriate... well people can do all kinds of stupid things in developing packages, in writing code. We can write an infinite loop into the kernel that copies blocks of memory back and forth for no reason. Are we banning the right to do stupid things now? No, that isn't appropriate. There are circumstances where file dependencies do make sense, such as when a file is generated by a process, rather than being part of a package.


                              At this point, I have to stop. If you want to continue to complain about rpm, you need to provide specific facts or arguments that support your position. Just screaming out "it sucks" it totally inadequate.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                I find it even now a problem that something that is useless for normal usage (file dependencies) and most of the time problematic to use to allow. In debian you have your package versions and formats and you have 10 of them, thats a problem right now, they try to make less diverted, so that you have not 20 possibilities to do the same thing.

                                So I think its valid to argue that that can be more negative than good, naturaly I cannot forbid some guys to fork the official rpm and add there stupid stuff, but when this stupid stuff is in the offical redhat implemantation its a problem.

                                So yes maybe nobody or nearly nobody uses such stuff than its more a theoretical discussion thats not very problematic in the praxis, but there I come to the next point that is really a problem.

                                In Ubuntu and Debian there are more official packages than in fedora, and as example ubuntu have universe where most of the unofficial packages are into.

                                In fedora that is not similar, they dont have a official community "universe" repos, the closest they have to that is rpm-fusion, but there are mixed together packages from different sites. So different qualitys.

                                so such problems with strict packaging rules are even more important... for universe they have the rpmfusion server, but there seems to be nearly not at least no official quality control. so I agree to have user-packages so that from all stuff there is a package, even if it is not perfectly in documentation as example, but you should have 2 spaces. like univers vs ppa in ubuntu, in fedora there is basicly no universe you get only ppalike stuff from rpmfusion.

                                and its called out from others here, that they need more quality control more freezing and stuff... I agree to that, and to follow the official wiki on chromium way to go, and then only become crap this way and I have to magicaly know that google gives away not only source files but also rpms. Is to much and even that is not very good, because I am not using windows so I want a few repos where I get my software from and I want that maybe a non-google worker saw that package and wrote some integration packages^^.

                                but yes not that big problems, just saying that its still a bit worse than ubuntu in some ways.

                                And maybe you are right its maybe not the format but what people did with it and do today... So I thought its the format but in reality its the people missuse it and less quality control than in debian/ubuntu packages.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X