LinuxQuestions.org
Support LQ: Use code LQ3 and save $3 on Domain Registration
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions
User Name
Password
Linux - Distributions This forum is for Distribution specific questions.
Red Hat, Slackware, Debian, Novell, LFS, Mandriva, Ubuntu, Fedora - the list goes on and on... Note: An (*) indicates there is no official participation from that distribution here at LQ.

Notices

View Poll Results: What one do you like better?
TXZ 2 25.00%
Pacman 4 50.00%
Both Equally 2 25.00%
Voters: 8. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 12-20-2010, 02:04 PM   #1
Amdx2_x64
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2008
Distribution: Left LQ. Mods are too Rude!
Posts: 598

Rep: Reputation: 50
Which package manager do you like more, TXZ or Pacman?


Well I have been bouncing around a little with different distro's lately. But my favorite so far is Arch Linux. I really do like Pacman. I have already looked into the why's and such on why Arch is just faster then anything else for me. So no need to get into all of that in this thread.

I am currently using Sabayon. I like it, nothing at all wrong with it but it is not what I want. Arch ruined other distro's for me, lol.

But... I have also been hearing great things about Slackware.

I am planning on installing Arch but I am wondering if I should try Slackware first.

So my question boils down to the package management of the two. Which one do you like better and why?


Edit: Distrowatch has TXZ as Slackware package management, is this correct? I never used Slackware so I don't know.

.

Last edited by Amdx2_x64; 12-20-2010 at 02:10 PM.
 
Old 12-20-2010, 02:14 PM   #2
repo
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: May 2001
Location: Belgium
Distribution: Linux Mint
Posts: 8,516

Rep: Reputation: 896Reputation: 896Reputation: 896Reputation: 896Reputation: 896Reputation: 896Reputation: 896
Yet another useless poll.
Just try it yourself, you are the only judge for this.

Kind regards
 
Old 12-20-2010, 02:15 PM   #3
ChrisAbela
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Malta
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 467

Rep: Reputation: 89
My experience is limited to Slackware and derivatives, Fedora & Co., and FreeBSD. I intend to try Arch one of these days as it is has an awful reputation. Nevertheless, Slackware's pkgtools are quite unique in that they do not resolve or care about dependencies. You may think of it as:

# cd /
# tar xvf appname-version_no-arch.t?z

However, the packages are still cleverly organized by the pkgtool. It is not a dump tool, but you may tune it to do the most absurd things if you want to as it is written in shell.

The emphasis is on simplicity, and frankly, I cannot imagine a faster packaging tool. Do not consider the dependency limitation as a limitation. If you follow a default installation, then all your dependencies are there. For extra packages, you will will need sbopkg and slackbuilds.org. They also handle dependencies via third party queue files in git repos.

Chris

Last edited by ChrisAbela; 12-20-2010 at 02:16 PM.
 
Old 12-20-2010, 03:06 PM   #4
ChrisAbela
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Malta
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 467

Rep: Reputation: 89
Quote:
Distrowatch has TXZ as Slackware package management, is this correct? I never used Slackware so I don't know.
Not really. The Slackware package tools are called pkgtool. It is an ncurses tool that may used on a VT. Or else you may install via slackpkg or directly in CLI:

# installpkg appname-version_no-arch.t?z

The packages may be *.tgz, *.tbz or *.txz and they are all zipped tarballs.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 12-21-2010, 01:11 AM   #5
Amdx2_x64
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2008
Distribution: Left LQ. Mods are too Rude!
Posts: 598

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by repo View Post
Yet another useless poll.
Just try it yourself, you are the only judge for this.

Kind regards

And yet another useless reply.

Last edited by Amdx2_x64; 12-21-2010 at 01:13 AM.
 
Old 12-21-2010, 01:12 AM   #6
Amdx2_x64
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2008
Distribution: Left LQ. Mods are too Rude!
Posts: 598

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisAbela View Post
Not really. The Slackware package tools are called pkgtool. It is an ncurses tool that may used on a VT. Or else you may install via slackpkg or directly in CLI:

# installpkg appname-version_no-arch.t?z

The packages may be *.tgz, *.tbz or *.txz and they are all zipped tarballs.

Thanks. I did get it wrong. After I made this "useless" poll I did more research and came across a few things about Slackware package management that made me wonder.

Thanks again for clarifying that for me.
 
Old 12-23-2010, 03:12 AM   #7
TheStarLion
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 472

Rep: Reputation: 41
Personally, I prefer Arch's way, but that's mostly because I'm too lazy to figure out and handle dependencies myself.
Even then, I tend to use a 3rd party wrapper for AUR integration.
 
Old 12-24-2010, 04:05 AM   #8
ChrisAbela
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Malta
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 467

Rep: Reputation: 89
Automatic Dependency checking is over-rated. For Slackware we do not cater for dependencies, because they are all installed be default. For third party packages created by SlackBuilds, the dependencies are documented in the README, and there are people maintaining queue files for every package in a specific repo (sbopkg.org). These are needed mostly for GNOME packages, that can drive you crazy if you try to follow the dependencies manually.

Chris
 
Old 12-25-2010, 02:14 AM   #9
TheStarLion
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 472

Rep: Reputation: 41
That may be so, and during the short time I got on with Slackware I'll grant it makes some things easier - but on the whole, where Arch seemed to prefer keeping to only what's necessary to make it work and leave everything else in opt-depends, it's fairly close to that, and IMO a nice way out for those who don't want to do dependencies.
 
Old 12-25-2010, 02:41 AM   #10
hilyard
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2010
Location: Inland PNW
Distribution: HandyLinux | Mint17XFCE
Posts: 287

Rep: Reputation: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amdx2_x64 View Post

But... I have also been hearing great things about Slackware.

I am planning on installing Arch but I am wondering if I should try Slackware first.

So my question boils down to the package management of the two. Which one do you like better and why?
.
Download Salix64-13.1.2-Xfce and give it a try,
Amdx2_x64. You'll like it, I think.

Pacman, but I'm flexible.

Happy Holidays!
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[SOLVED] Strange things happening with pacman package manager MTK358 Linux - General 9 02-11-2010 07:48 AM
[SOLVED] Is there any openoffice-org.txz prebuilt package? cola Slackware 4 12-26-2009 07:24 AM
how to make slackware package txz hoanglong1712 Slackware 4 09-20-2009 09:19 AM
LXer: Simple Package management with Synaptic Package Manager LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 12-05-2006 07:33 PM
Poll: Yast Package Manager vs. Smart Package Manager in 10.1 agentchange Suse/Novell 6 06-02-2006 09:29 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:19 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration