6 ms·

Linux Package Manager Command Line Comparison

71 points by denysonique 15y ago

klodolph 15y ago
Someone should mention package manager performance. Searching for a package in an Arch system will take a long time (10s or more) except on relatively fresh installs. It may have been fixed by now, but it was a serious point of irritation.
- Avshalom 15y ago
  Were you using XFS at the time? Search has never been a problem for me even on multi year old installs, but there was (is?) something about XFS that made pacman slow to a crawl.
  - klodolph 15y ago
    Nope. The problem happened on multiple systems (i386, x64) regardless of filesystem (ext3, reiser), although problems only start after a few months. I found a bug in the bug tracker for it with multiple people confirming it and the "solution" was to wipe the package database manually every once in a while.
- mziulu 15y ago
  In case someone else finds himself hitting this performance slowdown, try this: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32483 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32483
- lclarkmichalek 15y ago
  Personally I use the zsh completion for pacman over pacman -S as it is much faster
- clhodapp 15y ago
  Running pacman-optimize (part of the base pacman package) occasionally keeps the performance at an acceptable level for me.
nodata 15y ago
The yum stuff is missing parts... Use some magic to fix broken dependencies in a system: yum distro-sync or yum check and decide. Remove dependencies that are no longer needed: package-cleanup --orphans Downloads the corresponding source package(s) to the given package name(s): yumdownloader --source PACKAGENAME etc.
- l0nk 15y ago
  If you think something is missing feel free to add it =) And regarding the speed, well I got a server under Archlinux et another one under Debian, they have the same age (around 1 year ago, when squeeze come out) and pacman is more more quicker!
g3orge 15y ago
I was waiting something like that for a long time.
nicktelford 15y ago
I can't believe there are Debian/Ubuntu folks still not using "aptitude". Or that it's not installed by default.
- Mavrik 15y ago
  I've been using Ubuntu with apt-get for quite a few years now. What additional funcionality does aptitude offer over "plain" apt-get?
  - nicktelford 15y ago
    The biggest advantage is when removing packages; its dependency resolution is (supposedly) much better so it's able to find and remove orphan packages more accurately without hosing your system. It's also got a much friendlier set of commands: $ apt-get upgrade vim # aptitude upgrade vim $ apt-get dist-upgrade # aptitude full-upgrade $ apt-cache search # aptitude search $ apt-get install --reinstall vim # aptitude reinstall vim $ apt-get remove --purge vim # aptitude purge vim The list goes on. It's also got an awesome ncurses based interactive interface if you just type: $ aptitude Great for sysadmins who miss synaptic or anyone who feels like a GUI is just too mainstream.
    - ernesth 15y ago
      apt-get also is able to remove orphaned libraries. Among other "advantages" of aptitude, it can be terribly slower than apt-get. And it has a "smart" dependency engine that often proposes convoluted solutions (involving uninstalling packages I don't want uninstalled) when apt-get will simply update the dependency and their dependents... But at least, if you don't agree with the first solutions, it has others (sometimes including the one apt-get chooses).
    - bostonvaulter2 15y ago
      What's the history of the aptitude and apt-* family of commands? Why do they both exist?
      - 15y ago
bradleyland 15y ago
Most Debian/Ubuntu admins I know use aptitude these days, rather than apt-<tool> directly.
- pavelkaroukin 15y ago
  Could you please elaborate or give a link to article(s) about why aptitude is better?
  - monkeyfacebag 15y ago
    Aptitude handles package removal, especially orphaned dependencies much better. I think it's now included in the Debian base system, so there's very little reason to prefer apt.
    - saghul 15y ago
      I actually use apt-get because I like to keep my system with the least amount of packages installed. I don't need any of the "recommended" packages, and if I do I'd install them manually. Also, I usually use deborphan to find orphaned packages and remove them, if apt-get autoremove didn't find them.
      - Tobu 15y ago
        Recommends are handled the same way by both tools nowadays. There are configuration options and flags to switch them off it you prefer.
      - sciurus 15y ago
        You probably already know this, but apt-get defaults to installing recommended packages since Debian Lenny. Ubuntu may have been doing it for longer. To disable this, you have to set 'APT::Install-Recommends "false";' in apt.conf
    - technomancy 15y ago
      I tried switching to aptitude, but the fact that its search defaults to OR for terms rather than AND made it completely unusable. I guess I could keep using apt-cache for searching and aptitude for installation/removal though.
phunehehe 15y ago
Hah! So there is something on the front page of HN that I have referred to for years :)
virtualritz 15y ago
Critically misses the most advanced package manager currently available: Paludis. http://paludis.exherbo.org/ http://paludis.exherbo.org/

71 points by denysonique 15y ago

Someone should mention package manager performance. Searching for a package in an Arch system will take a long time (10s or more) except on relatively fresh installs. It may have been fixed by now, but it was a serious point of irritation.

Avshalom 15y ago
Were you using XFS at the time? Search has never been a problem for me even on multi year old installs, but there was (is?) something about XFS that made pacman slow to a crawl.
- klodolph 15y ago
  Nope. The problem happened on multiple systems (i386, x64) regardless of filesystem (ext3, reiser), although problems only start after a few months. I found a bug in the bug tracker for it with multiple people confirming it and the "solution" was to wipe the package database manually every once in a while.
mziulu 15y ago
In case someone else finds himself hitting this performance slowdown, try this: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32483 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=32483
lclarkmichalek 15y ago
Personally I use the zsh completion for pacman over pacman -S as it is much faster
clhodapp 15y ago
Running pacman-optimize (part of the base pacman package) occasionally keeps the performance at an acceptable level for me.

nodata 15y ago

The yum stuff is missing parts... Use some magic to fix broken dependencies in a system: yum distro-sync or yum check and decide. Remove dependencies that are no longer needed: package-cleanup --orphans Downloads the corresponding source package(s) to the given package name(s): yumdownloader --source PACKAGENAME etc.

l0nk 15y ago
If you think something is missing feel free to add it =) And regarding the speed, well I got a server under Archlinux et another one under Debian, they have the same age (around 1 year ago, when squeeze come out) and pacman is more more quicker!

g3orge 15y ago

I was waiting something like that for a long time.

nicktelford 15y ago

I can't believe there are Debian/Ubuntu folks still not using "aptitude". Or that it's not installed by default.

Mavrik 15y ago
I've been using Ubuntu with apt-get for quite a few years now. What additional funcionality does aptitude offer over "plain" apt-get?
- nicktelford 15y ago
  The biggest advantage is when removing packages; its dependency resolution is (supposedly) much better so it's able to find and remove orphan packages more accurately without hosing your system. It's also got a much friendlier set of commands: $ apt-get upgrade vim # aptitude upgrade vim $ apt-get dist-upgrade # aptitude full-upgrade $ apt-cache search # aptitude search $ apt-get install --reinstall vim # aptitude reinstall vim $ apt-get remove --purge vim # aptitude purge vim The list goes on. It's also got an awesome ncurses based interactive interface if you just type: $ aptitude Great for sysadmins who miss synaptic or anyone who feels like a GUI is just too mainstream.
  - ernesth 15y ago
    apt-get also is able to remove orphaned libraries. Among other "advantages" of aptitude, it can be terribly slower than apt-get. And it has a "smart" dependency engine that often proposes convoluted solutions (involving uninstalling packages I don't want uninstalled) when apt-get will simply update the dependency and their dependents... But at least, if you don't agree with the first solutions, it has others (sometimes including the one apt-get chooses).
  - bostonvaulter2 15y ago
    What's the history of the aptitude and apt-* family of commands? Why do they both exist?
    - 15y ago

bradleyland 15y ago

Most Debian/Ubuntu admins I know use aptitude these days, rather than apt-<tool> directly.

pavelkaroukin 15y ago
Could you please elaborate or give a link to article(s) about why aptitude is better?
- monkeyfacebag 15y ago
  Aptitude handles package removal, especially orphaned dependencies much better. I think it's now included in the Debian base system, so there's very little reason to prefer apt.
  - saghul 15y ago
    I actually use apt-get because I like to keep my system with the least amount of packages installed. I don't need any of the "recommended" packages, and if I do I'd install them manually. Also, I usually use deborphan to find orphaned packages and remove them, if apt-get autoremove didn't find them.
    - Tobu 15y ago
      Recommends are handled the same way by both tools nowadays. There are configuration options and flags to switch them off it you prefer.
    - sciurus 15y ago
      You probably already know this, but apt-get defaults to installing recommended packages since Debian Lenny. Ubuntu may have been doing it for longer. To disable this, you have to set 'APT::Install-Recommends "false";' in apt.conf
  - technomancy 15y ago
    I tried switching to aptitude, but the fact that its search defaults to OR for terms rather than AND made it completely unusable. I guess I could keep using apt-cache for searching and aptitude for installation/removal though.

phunehehe 15y ago

Hah! So there is something on the front page of HN that I have referred to for years :)

virtualritz 15y ago

Critically misses the most advanced package manager currently available: Paludis. http://paludis.exherbo.org/ http://paludis.exherbo.org/