4 ms·

If you use an OS that doesn't do package management, maybe. Linux distros work just fine.

by dima55 4y ago

IshKebab 4y ago
As long as you only ever use packages from your distro's packaging system.
adhesive_wombat 4y ago
Until you have something that uses conda.
bzxcvbn 4y ago
The existence of nix, nvm, conda, venv... or even docker suggests otherwise.
- oneplane 4y ago
  Out of that list, only nix is a system package manager. The rest are developer tools and runtime configurations.
  - aprdm 4y ago
    How is conda different than nix in this regard?
    - oneplane 4y ago
      Conda is a subset of Nix in this regard.
  - bscphil 4y ago
    > The rest are developer tools and runtime configurations. I wish people understood this, but sadly they seem to be more and more common as primary modes for software distribution.
rstat1 4y ago
Except for when they don't. Which is more often than it should be. If I had a dime for every hour of my life wasted by distro package managers (or really any package manager) breaking when I try to do some basic operation, I'd be a very rich person.
- ravenstine 4y ago
  It's been a long while since I've used Linux for anything but servers, but I have to agree. Not just with package management but pretty much anything in Linux outside the server domain. I used to waste so much time dealing with conflicts between packages, but also on weird bugs with graphics and audio, xorg.conf, etc., just to get things to work as expected. This comment kinda just turned into a rant about Linux in general. Unless things have changed, I wouldn't recommend Linux as a desktop to anyone but masochists. It's definitely a good thing that Linux distros have package management built-in, but that doesn't mean there aren't significant drawbacks to the way the Linux community approaches it. In contrast, I rarely have issues when I run `brew install`. My memories of Aptitude aren't particularly fond.
  - blep_ 4y ago
    xorg.conf doesn't even exist anymore on most systems. The others have been improved quite a bit since "a long while" ago. That doesn't mean you have to try it again to update your opinions, if you have something else you're happy with now, but it does mean you should consider not spreading nonsense about things you haven't used.
    - Beltalowda 4y ago
      I can't even remember the last time I had to look at an xorg configuration file. I think it must have been a decade; maybe longer. Back in the XFree86 and early Xorg days it could be a pain though, but that was a long time ago. "X -configure" asking you about monitor refresh rates that I never knew the answer to ... ah, old times.
  - howinteresting 4y ago
dmitriid 4y ago
Which one of the distros with which flavor of a package manager do you suggest? And have those package managers manage to work without sudo in 2022?
- pxc 4y ago
  Nix, Guix, and Flatpak all work fine without root privileges. But why is that a requirement? Homebrew doesn't work without root; it only pretends to.
  - dmitriid 4y ago
    > Nix, Guix, and Flatpak How many of those are "built in into OS unlike the other OSes"? > But why is that a requirement? Homebrew doesn't work without root; it only pretends to. Can't remember when I last needed to run sudo with brew. Whereas I've yet to see a Linux distribution able to install anything per user.
    - pxc 4y ago
      > How many of those are "built in into OS unlike the other OSes"? There are distros where each of the three is shipped with the OS and used to distribute applications that are installed by default, but Flatpak isn't a 'system package manager' in that it doesn't supply things like the libc that lives in /usr/lib or equivalent. All three are also portable and hermetic enough, though, that they can safely be used on other operating systems without interfering with the base system. > Whereas I've yet to see a Linux distribution able to install anything per user. This is the norm on NixOS and GuixSD, the distros based on the Nix and Guix package managers, respectively. That kind of thing is still fairly marginal in the overall Linux landscape. It's also feasible with container-based package managers, which are growing in adoption, Flatpak chief among them. Both NixOS and GuixSD have their own issues and can present special challenges to users, but the per-user package management functionality works well and is cool to see in action. They're definitely worth playing with in VMs if you haven't used them. --------- Homebrew has been useful to many people for a long time, and it absolutely excels in UX. But the fundamentals are lacking and it's hard for third-party package managers to cope with Apple's changes on major macOS releases. There are definitely things that could improve for developers with a first-party offering. I get the defensiveness and I understand that Homebrew has strengths, but imo the standard critique along the lines of the OP is essentially correct.

If you use an OS that doesn't do package management, maybe. Linux distros work just fine.

by dima55 4y ago

If you use an OS that doesn't do package management, maybe. Linux distros work just fine.

IshKebab 4y ago

As long as you only ever use packages from your distro's packaging system.

adhesive_wombat 4y ago

Until you have something that uses conda.

bzxcvbn 4y ago

The existence of nix, nvm, conda, venv... or even docker suggests otherwise.

oneplane 4y ago
Out of that list, only nix is a system package manager. The rest are developer tools and runtime configurations.
- aprdm 4y ago
  How is conda different than nix in this regard?
  - oneplane 4y ago
    Conda is a subset of Nix in this regard.
- bscphil 4y ago
  > The rest are developer tools and runtime configurations. I wish people understood this, but sadly they seem to be more and more common as primary modes for software distribution.

rstat1 4y ago

Except for when they don't. Which is more often than it should be. If I had a dime for every hour of my life wasted by distro package managers (or really any package manager) breaking when I try to do some basic operation, I'd be a very rich person.

ravenstine 4y ago
It's been a long while since I've used Linux for anything but servers, but I have to agree. Not just with package management but pretty much anything in Linux outside the server domain. I used to waste so much time dealing with conflicts between packages, but also on weird bugs with graphics and audio, xorg.conf, etc., just to get things to work as expected. This comment kinda just turned into a rant about Linux in general. Unless things have changed, I wouldn't recommend Linux as a desktop to anyone but masochists. It's definitely a good thing that Linux distros have package management built-in, but that doesn't mean there aren't significant drawbacks to the way the Linux community approaches it. In contrast, I rarely have issues when I run `brew install`. My memories of Aptitude aren't particularly fond.
- blep_ 4y ago
  xorg.conf doesn't even exist anymore on most systems. The others have been improved quite a bit since "a long while" ago. That doesn't mean you have to try it again to update your opinions, if you have something else you're happy with now, but it does mean you should consider not spreading nonsense about things you haven't used.
  - Beltalowda 4y ago
    I can't even remember the last time I had to look at an xorg configuration file. I think it must have been a decade; maybe longer. Back in the XFree86 and early Xorg days it could be a pain though, but that was a long time ago. "X -configure" asking you about monitor refresh rates that I never knew the answer to ... ah, old times.
- howinteresting 4y ago

dmitriid 4y ago

Which one of the distros with which flavor of a package manager do you suggest? And have those package managers manage to work without sudo in 2022?

pxc 4y ago
Nix, Guix, and Flatpak all work fine without root privileges. But why is that a requirement? Homebrew doesn't work without root; it only pretends to.
- dmitriid 4y ago
  > Nix, Guix, and Flatpak How many of those are "built in into OS unlike the other OSes"? > But why is that a requirement? Homebrew doesn't work without root; it only pretends to. Can't remember when I last needed to run sudo with brew. Whereas I've yet to see a Linux distribution able to install anything per user.
  - pxc 4y ago
    > How many of those are "built in into OS unlike the other OSes"? There are distros where each of the three is shipped with the OS and used to distribute applications that are installed by default, but Flatpak isn't a 'system package manager' in that it doesn't supply things like the libc that lives in /usr/lib or equivalent. All three are also portable and hermetic enough, though, that they can safely be used on other operating systems without interfering with the base system. > Whereas I've yet to see a Linux distribution able to install anything per user. This is the norm on NixOS and GuixSD, the distros based on the Nix and Guix package managers, respectively. That kind of thing is still fairly marginal in the overall Linux landscape. It's also feasible with container-based package managers, which are growing in adoption, Flatpak chief among them. Both NixOS and GuixSD have their own issues and can present special challenges to users, but the per-user package management functionality works well and is cool to see in action. They're definitely worth playing with in VMs if you haven't used them. --------- Homebrew has been useful to many people for a long time, and it absolutely excels in UX. But the fundamentals are lacking and it's hard for third-party package managers to cope with Apple's changes on major macOS releases. There are definitely things that could improve for developers with a first-party offering. I get the defensiveness and I understand that Homebrew has strengths, but imo the standard critique along the lines of the OP is essentially correct.