5 ms·

Package management on Linux is a real mess. It works great if you're running a server with standard software from official distro repos that is infrequently upd

Package management on Linux is a real mess. It works great if you're running a server with standard software from official distro repos that is infrequently updated. As soon as you go outside that it quickly goes wrong in my experience (I've been using Linux since around 1999).. Recently my RaspberryPi media server's packages completely blew up because a third party repo messed something up which now has half installed a broken package and I cannot figure out how to fix it. This has happened basically every time I have used desktop Linux with any third party PPAs/repos to vary degrees of brokenness. This has _never_ happened to me on Windows/Mac (at least since the NT4 days - obviously software has broken things but I've never managed to break software installation system wide like this on other OSs). Even homebrew which I have used in anger seems to break far far less often than apt/dkpg despite having much more bleeding edge software.

Breazy 5y ago
> It works great if you're running a server with standard software from official distro repos that is infrequently updated. It's not frequent updates that screwed you, it's using third party repos. OpenSUSE Tumbleweed is an RPM based rolling release distro with up-to-date software that I've found to be very suitable, and stable, for desktop use. Before switching to Tumbleweed, I previously used Debian Sid for a long time. Contrary to Sid's 'unstable' moniker, was always very stable for me when I wasn't pulling in 3rd party repos or trying to mix Sid with Stable (the notorious 'frankendebian'.)
- martinald 5y ago
  By "infrequently updated", I mean software where it is "ok" to be running versions released months/years ago in the official repos and not having to resort to 3rd party repos to get more up to date software. Nearly everyone has to use 3rd party software at some point though. There just isn't a good solution for this on Linux. Too many people assume Linux users only use open source software that is in the official package repos. It totally excludes commercial software, niche stuff, etc.
kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
If you want software outside the official repo that isn't self contained you should use a container or build it yourself and install into the /usr/local tree. Don't cross the streams.
- jcelerier 5y ago
  It works so much better with archlinux than with Debian though
  - selfhoster11 5y ago
    Rebuilding an official or unofficial package on Arch is so refreshingly simple. On Debian or Ubuntu, it seems significantly harder. Arch is basically superior to Gentoo for me in that respect. Things are mostly binary, except when I choose to build from source. For someone who doesn't want to tweak compile-time flags, it's a good distro.
bogota 5y ago
Why is anyone still using packages for bloated software like plex? Pull the docker container and call it a day.
3np 5y ago
You mention a server, but just putting it out there: Your distro can make the whole difference, there. I've gone though various distros and platforms over the years. My personal choice for server/headless - Debian - would not be something I run on a desktop these days. Many times for desktop, you want to run specific versions, apply specific patches, run a specific kernel, etc. Arch, Gentoo or NixOS may be a better pick. Or just run OCI containers. If you don't want to bother with building your own, linuxserver have a decent library. When running an underserved platform-use-case combo (Plex/Jellyfin on debian on arm64) I've found the smoothest route is often to build the .deb packages yourself (in a proper automated repo if you want to scale, locally installed with dpkg if it's not too much). Much easier than chasing dubious ppas that may or work or not for your setup.
- martinald 5y ago
  The problem is a lot of 3rd party software requires a 'mainstream' distro, especially commercial software. Regardless, my point isn't that it's not possible to solve it, which it potentially is with enough work, but the out of the box experience of the most popular Linux distros is very poor for software management for desktop/fast moving software. This really hasn't improved much in the 20+ years I've used Linux.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
> Package management on Linux is a real mess. It works great if you're running a server with standard software from official distro repos that is infrequently updated. > As soon as you go outside that it quickly goes wrong in my experience (I've been using Linux since around 1999). My entry to Linux was slightly later, but I have the same opinion. What's worse is that it is maddening when you try and express this to the Linux Desktop community, they will tell you its 'insecure' to use third party packages and you shouldn't do it[0], or that you should put everything in a container[1], or explain that because freedom you can always compile from source[2]! We are fortunate that parts of the community are finally waking up to the problem and trying to deal with it with things like AppImage[3] and Flatpak[4], at least for desktop software. [0] There isn't really any greater theoretical insecurity with third party packages than first, but more importantly I'm not going to refrain from running software I need to run because it hasn't been blessed by some volunteer third party who almost certainly hasn't actually reviewed the code anyway. If the alternative is not running software then I'll take the risk, it is mine to take. [1] Ever wonder why other desktop operating systems don't need to do this? It's adding a bunch of unnecessary complexity and extra management to what should be one of the primary things one can do with a personal computer! [2] Leaving aside that that is a pretty ridiculous expectation, build environments are often complicated enough that projects distribute theirs in a container to avoid dealing with all the problems that could be caused because of conflicts and missing or out of date packages. Basically the same problems as compiled software! [3] AppImage has been around a long time and so had its earlier incarnations (ROX AppDirs and Klik). I love it, but it isn't as popular as Flatpak seems to be. [4] I have my issues with implementation, but at least it is dealing with a lot of the traditional model's problems including finally allowing me to install software to a different disk. Still has a ways to go to become ubiquitous, but it is making a lot of headway.
- martinald 5y ago
  Agreed entirely. I was actually expecting to be massively downvoted for this post.

Breazy 5y ago

> It works great if you're running a server with standard software from official distro repos that is infrequently updated. It's not frequent updates that screwed you, it's using third party repos. OpenSUSE Tumbleweed is an RPM based rolling release distro with up-to-date software that I've found to be very suitable, and stable, for desktop use. Before switching to Tumbleweed, I previously used Debian Sid for a long time. Contrary to Sid's 'unstable' moniker, was always very stable for me when I wasn't pulling in 3rd party repos or trying to mix Sid with Stable (the notorious 'frankendebian'.)

martinald 5y ago
By "infrequently updated", I mean software where it is "ok" to be running versions released months/years ago in the official repos and not having to resort to 3rd party repos to get more up to date software. Nearly everyone has to use 3rd party software at some point though. There just isn't a good solution for this on Linux. Too many people assume Linux users only use open source software that is in the official package repos. It totally excludes commercial software, niche stuff, etc.

kevin_thibedeau 5y ago

If you want software outside the official repo that isn't self contained you should use a container or build it yourself and install into the /usr/local tree. Don't cross the streams.

jcelerier 5y ago
It works so much better with archlinux than with Debian though
- selfhoster11 5y ago
  Rebuilding an official or unofficial package on Arch is so refreshingly simple. On Debian or Ubuntu, it seems significantly harder. Arch is basically superior to Gentoo for me in that respect. Things are mostly binary, except when I choose to build from source. For someone who doesn't want to tweak compile-time flags, it's a good distro.

bogota 5y ago

Why is anyone still using packages for bloated software like plex? Pull the docker container and call it a day.

3np 5y ago

You mention a server, but just putting it out there: Your distro can make the whole difference, there. I've gone though various distros and platforms over the years. My personal choice for server/headless - Debian - would not be something I run on a desktop these days. Many times for desktop, you want to run specific versions, apply specific patches, run a specific kernel, etc. Arch, Gentoo or NixOS may be a better pick. Or just run OCI containers. If you don't want to bother with building your own, linuxserver have a decent library. When running an underserved platform-use-case combo (Plex/Jellyfin on debian on arm64) I've found the smoothest route is often to build the .deb packages yourself (in a proper automated repo if you want to scale, locally installed with dpkg if it's not too much). Much easier than chasing dubious ppas that may or work or not for your setup.

martinald 5y ago
The problem is a lot of 3rd party software requires a 'mainstream' distro, especially commercial software. Regardless, my point isn't that it's not possible to solve it, which it potentially is with enough work, but the out of the box experience of the most popular Linux distros is very poor for software management for desktop/fast moving software. This really hasn't improved much in the 20+ years I've used Linux.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago

> Package management on Linux is a real mess. It works great if you're running a server with standard software from official distro repos that is infrequently updated. > As soon as you go outside that it quickly goes wrong in my experience (I've been using Linux since around 1999). My entry to Linux was slightly later, but I have the same opinion. What's worse is that it is maddening when you try and express this to the Linux Desktop community, they will tell you its 'insecure' to use third party packages and you shouldn't do it[0], or that you should put everything in a container[1], or explain that because freedom you can always compile from source[2]! We are fortunate that parts of the community are finally waking up to the problem and trying to deal with it with things like AppImage[3] and Flatpak[4], at least for desktop software. [0] There isn't really any greater theoretical insecurity with third party packages than first, but more importantly I'm not going to refrain from running software I need to run because it hasn't been blessed by some volunteer third party who almost certainly hasn't actually reviewed the code anyway. If the alternative is not running software then I'll take the risk, it is mine to take. [1] Ever wonder why other desktop operating systems don't need to do this? It's adding a bunch of unnecessary complexity and extra management to what should be one of the primary things one can do with a personal computer! [2] Leaving aside that that is a pretty ridiculous expectation, build environments are often complicated enough that projects distribute theirs in a container to avoid dealing with all the problems that could be caused because of conflicts and missing or out of date packages. Basically the same problems as compiled software! [3] AppImage has been around a long time and so had its earlier incarnations (ROX AppDirs and Klik). I love it, but it isn't as popular as Flatpak seems to be. [4] I have my issues with implementation, but at least it is dealing with a lot of the traditional model's problems including finally allowing me to install software to a different disk. Still has a ways to go to become ubiquitous, but it is making a lot of headway.

martinald 5y ago
Agreed entirely. I was actually expecting to be massively downvoted for this post.