DebianThis forum is for the discussion of Debian Linux.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
I was on the sidux site yesterday and came across this quote about Aptitude:
"Package managers like aptitude are not always able to account for the huge amount of changes which happen in Sid (dependency changes, name changes, maintainer script changes, ...). That's not the fault of the developers of those tools though, they write a excellent tools and fabulous for the debian stable branch, they are simply just not suitable for the very special needs of Debian Sid and thus sidux."
"Package managers like adept, aptitude, synaptic and kpackage are at the least, non-deterministic (for complex package selection), mix that with a quickly moving target like sid and even worse an external repository of questionable quality (we don't use or recommend those, but they're a reality on your user systems) and you will be courting disaster."
I use Aptitude with Sid and have never had a problem. Can someone comment on the above quote please. If I am running Testing or Unstable should I in fact be using apt-get instead of Aptitude?
Last edited by parent's_basement; 10-18-2008 at 08:55 PM.
Nobody who uses Aptitude with Sid has a problem. I don't know whether or not people who use Sidux have problems, but I doubt it. That said, the Sidux developers have a long standing policy against using it.
My theory is that it's just part of their necessary scare tactics against people using Sid proper. They don't really add anything important for anyone other than incompetent newbies, and it's important for them to make sure their users stay that way.
sidux site prefer sidux ...lower case s please....even tho I am guilty of using lower case most of the time. Yes they do not like aptitude.
I disagree with some points you appear to be making.
1) I am new to sidux and have not been scared off by anyone at sidux forum or irc.
2) Quote "They don't really add anything important for anyone other than incompetent newbies, and it's important for them to make sure their users stay that way."
Calling new users incompetent is not what I suggest is gracious and seems to me to suggest some level of arrogance. Surely all newbies have medium to high levels of incompetence simply because they are newbies?
3) As I am getting more experienced with sidux...I have found some people that, tho not agreeing to your suggestion of scare tactics, are puzzled by the main players having such strong anti-aptitude feelings.
I am guessing ...the maintainers have been hurt in the past problably with Kanotix and aptitude and may have resolved to not go down that path again.
AFAIK ...the maintainers of the smxi script has a healthy regard for aptitude and similar products
and smxi is not just for sidux users
4) Just to repeat one point that is not clear in (3) most newbies use smxi which protects them from having to read all the upgrade warnings etc by allowing someone to maintain a script to put packages on hold. There is of course a lot more to smxi but I leave that to the readers of this post to decide.
Actually sidux rocks. Does Debian have the 2.6.27 kernel? The sidux commnunity has filed a lot of bugs and quite a few patches. Bugs usually get fixed the day they are noticed, and the fix sent upstream to debian.
sidux makes running Debian Sid easy and safe even for people that are new to Debian. Yes the devs have a few weird attitudes. The aptitude vs apt thing can be beat to death, both work, use whichever works best for you. smxi rocks!! Try asking about sid issues in #debian and watch how many people flame you.
$ infobash -v3
Host/Kernel/OS "craigevil" running Linux 2.6.27-1.slh.1-sidux-686 i686 [ sidux 2007-04.5 - Έρως christmas special - kde-full - (200712260138) ]
CPU Info (1) Intel Pentium 4 1024 KB cache flags( sse3 nx lm ) clocked at [ 2792.939 MHz ]
(2) Intel Pentium 4 1024 KB cache flags( sse3 nx lm ) clocked at [ 2792.939 MHz ]
Videocard Intel 82915G/GV/910GL Integrated Graphics Controller X.Org 1.4.2 [ firstname.lastname@example.org ]
Network cards Intel 82562ET/EZ/GT/GZ - PRO/100 VE (LOM) Ethernet Controller, at port: dcc0
Processes 90 | Uptime 13:52 | Memory 314.7/493.7MB | HDD TEAC USB HS-CF Card,TEAC USB HS-xD/SM,ATA WDC WD1600JS-75N,TEAC USB HS-MS Card,TEAC USB HS-SD Card Size 160GB (26%used) | Client Shell | Infobash v3.01
How does sidux not support pretty much anything thats in Debian? It uses Debian repos and the sidux repos for things like kernel, scripts, artwork, and bug fixes; other than that its Debian. If you want gnome, e17 or whatever you simply apt-get install whatever. Just because there aren't 50 different versions of sidux all of which the only difference is the desktop/wm like Ubuntu doesn't mean crap. many people use gnome, e17, lxde any lots of other desktops/wm in sidux, just because there isn't a separate installer for a silly de/wm doesn't mean they don't support them.
Granted it doesn't have an installer for all the arches Debian does but neither does Ubuntu. No way does Ubuntu support more packages, anything thats in the Debian repos can easily be installed and used in sidux. Synaptic shows I can install a little over 24k packages, with Debian, debian-multimedia and sidux repos in my sources.list/
As you are the Op lets get on topic eh? I do not need to read my first post to know you asked a question. And I sidetracked myself...I will give myself twenty lashes but maybe not as I might enjoy it. I have already impied that I am not a sidux guru but IMHO the answer is
a) use apt-get and get full support at forum and main sidux irc
b) use any other package manager and no full support at forum...but there is at least one chat
where I know at least one member uses aptitude
....IMHO distro are entitled to be transparent on their policies and I ...or you can choose to accept some or all of that.
I do not use eg...the sidux/Debian FSF ose virtualbox but the closed source.
Are you also craigevil, logging on with two accounts to respond? I was speaking to him about a directly relevant issue between sidux and debian. "And I sidetracked myself...I will give myself twenty lashes but maybe not as I might enjoy it." Ok mate, not sure what you're rambling on about here. Are you posting to the correct thread?
I have listened to the back and forth in the sidux forums and IRC about aptitude for well over a year that I have used sidux. There have been many angry threads and discussions about whether it's useful or not in sid. Personally, I like apt-get and have sat in the background while these arguments have gone on. I've never used aptitude, and, from what I understand, you can't use both on the same system. You have to start with one or the other and stay with the one you've chosen.
So, anyway, a group of users decided to test their theories and started using aptitude on their sidux systems. For a while, it seemed, that as aptitude has evolved, many of the original problems that caused the sidux devs to shun aptitude had vanished. This is MY understanding of what I have read, this may or may not be the feelings of others in the sidux community. While many are still testing aptitude it seems that a major problem has been found, that has to do with the way holds are handled. You can read the thread here:
It may be, that the fears and understandings that the sidux devs had about using aptitude with sidux have a basis in fact. Or, maybe the sidux devs know their own distro well enough to give suggestions that should be followed. And, if you feel the need to trash someone, because you don't agree with them, even if there are viable points on both sides of the argument, then, maybe you should chill and get a life. (/sarcasm Or go work for the McCain campaign. /endsarcasm).