Click to See Complete Forum and Search --> : Which distro has the MOST native software?
IsaacKuo
10-27-2005, 03:30 PM
One of the things I value about Debian is that it has a lot of software in its default repositories, and even outside the default repositories there are a lot of .deb packages which work without a fuss.
But I'm wondering--how do the other Linux distributions compare in terms of amount of native software? By "native software", I mean software packages managed by the de facto standard package management system. I expect "native software" to be well tested and installed with no fuss and no muss.
The Linux distributions I'm most interested in trying out are Slackware and Gentoo. I'm pretty sure Gentoo has a lot of native software--more than Debian, right? What about Slackware? Arch?
(I don't have a spare computer suitable for Gentoo, though. As I understand it, compile times on a 333mhz Celeron will be unbearable.)
Thanks!
If you are looking for lots of software packaged by the maintainer, then forget slackware. People malign it's package manager, because it does not resolve dependencies, but that's a plus for me (Dependency hell, anyone? ;) ) Pat doesn't patch much, and doesn't provide a whole lot (although it's more than most think), but the thing that's nice, is Slack plays very well with packages you build yourself, which is something many other distros don't excel at.
As far as Gentoo, I haven't run it myself, but I hear distcc can compile things on other machines for you.
cybertron
10-27-2005, 04:39 PM
I just read that Portage has ~130k files in it, but that doesn't really tell you much because it includes all the multiple versions of the same stuff and I think it includes some additional helper files. In any case, yeah, there are a lot of apps in Portage. Not sure how it compares to Debian though.
And you're right, compile times on that system with Gentoo would be atrocious. It took me at least a day to compile just my basic software on my computer, and that doesn't include stuff that I've installed since then (I have 463 packages installed from portage ATM).
sasKuatch
10-27-2005, 04:39 PM
With Debian, there literally isn't anything I need that isn't in the package system. The only time I compile things is when I want a newer version or a custom compiled-in option. I look at it as actually having a choice as to what you want: binary or source. I'm not forced to compile tons of software that will be a pain to remove later.
But that's just me, I love Debian. :)
Rob
retsaw
10-27-2005, 05:07 PM
Arch doesn't have loads of packages, but it should have most of the ones you want in it's Current and Extras repositories, though you'll most likely have to add in the Community repository as well.
As for compile times on Gentoo, if it is networked to other more powerful machines you can offload some/most/all of the compiling to the other machines using distcc, which would then make using it a viable option.
but who cares? even if it doesn't come with something, you can still install _any_ sfotware you want to. i have never understood why people care what it "comes with".
retsaw
10-27-2005, 07:49 PM
Convenience.
You might be able to install any software you want, but it is a lot easier if it is already packaged up for your distro.
Personally, as long as it has most software I want, I don't mind going out of my way to install the few other bits I want myself.
Sepero
10-27-2005, 08:06 PM
@Hayl
./configure... break
fix, fix, fix
./configure... break
fix, fix, fix
./configure... success
make... break
etc.
No thanks. I've been down that (slack) road.
I use Debian.
@Hayl
./configure... break
fix, fix, fix
./configure... break
fix, fix, fix
./configure... success
make... break
etc.
No thanks. I've been down that (slack) road.
I use Debian.
To each his own, and not to discredit your experiences, but that is the reason many people go to slack, not away. I have yet to break anything while installing from source. Hell, I've yet to have anything break on slack, period. I have had some trouble (well, sometimes more than a little ;) ) getting some software to install at all, but nothing ever broke my system.
Recently, I did set up an ubuntu partition on my laptop, and I boot into it every once in a while. Apt-get, with the synaptic front-end, is pretty sweet, though.
blackbelt_jones
10-27-2005, 11:09 PM
Either the answer is obviously Debian, or I don't understand the question.
JamminJoeyB
10-27-2005, 11:09 PM
I have to agree with Hayl.
I very rarely find something that I can't /config make make install.
Yes it is nice to have something packaged, but it's not necessary.
Of course you do have to read what the dependencies are on the source you are compiling, but most users usually figure out how to compile from source after a couple of months.
knute
10-27-2005, 11:37 PM
I've tried Slack. I didn't use it for long, because it was frusterating to me, when I didn't know where to look to find a dependency that was covered with some lib that didn't really help matters any anyway.
However, I must say that Slack was the ONLY distro that I could install on a 386, with 256m HDD, and 4m memory. It ran in CLI, but I could do email, IM, and even play a few games!
I've used Debian for like 6 years, and didn't really have to compile a thing, but for an occasional kernel. There were a few programs that I wanted to try that I had to find the deb's that would let me build with, but that was few and far between.
My biggest complaint with Debian was that it was TOO EASY to install software, that I'd just install it, and play with it, and if I didn't likeit I never took it off the system, so I ended up with TONS of cruft on my system that I never used.
If I were to set up a linux system in a business, I'd put Debian on with out hesitation, simply for the speed of the install.
Gentoo is what I currently use. It's on a 733mhz with 512m memory. Compile times aren't that big of a deal. I do an emerge -uavND world before I go to bed, and most times it's either done, or almost so (depending upon whether it had to compile the libc libraries or not) that when I'm ready to use it, it's waiting for me. :)
It also forces to me do some research on a program before I spend the time installing it, to see if it's actually worth installing. :cool:
As far as for distro native software, well, that's really an irrelevant question when you have the likes of alien that can convert packages from one type to another.
If you are looking at windows based software on linux, well, then you have wine (http://winehq.org) or... Uhhh... I know there's other's out there. I've used wine with the few windows based games that I play, and have had really good success with it. :D
IsaacKuo
10-28-2005, 07:44 AM
Thanks for all the info, everyone! I guess I won't be replacing Debian on my main workstation anytime soon, but I'll just put Slackware on my spare PC for now, and see how MMV for the success/failure of installing from source.
So far, I haven't had good luck installing from source, but I shall see...
But what about an rpm based distribution? I would have suspected that since they're the most popular, one of them would have the most native software available. Or is there still rpm dependency hell? Or are the de facto "standard" software repositories not really very extensive?
I haven't played with rpm based distributions in a long time, so I don't know.
Sepero
10-28-2005, 08:32 AM
I have yet to break anything while installing from source.Sorry, I think you thought I said "system break". What I meant is that compiling from source can easily become a PITA, even on slack.
My biggest complaint with Debian was that it was TOO EASY to install software, that I'd just install it, and play with it, and if I didn't likeit I never took it off the system, so I ended up with TONS of cruft on my system that I never used.That is what "debfoster" and "deborphan" are for. Keeps my systems very clean.
http://libranet-basics.berlios.de/libranet-2-8/html/pkgmgmt.html#AEN1544
psych-major
10-28-2005, 11:02 AM
I have to say that Slackware gets it done for me. It comes with a fair selection out of the gate, there's some handy things on CD #3, and swaret to keep it all up to date, with dependancy checking...
Then you can head over to linuxpackages for a bunch more stuff, and for whatever's still missing, ./configure && make && make install...
Sepero: My bad.
Psych-major: I've used swaret, and it was nice, but what is the point of a tool that has dependency checking, when Pat's packages don't have that functionality?
mmills
10-28-2005, 02:24 PM
but who cares? even if it doesn't come with something, you can still install _any_ sfotware you want to. i have never understood why people care what it "comes with".
Reason number 1. Honey are you done playing on the computer (wife) .....(husband thinks of good excuse) just one more minute dear...,you know this isnt ubuntu I just cant say apt get and its done.......Im sleeping on the couch.....(husband)