Is apt-get objectively the best package manager?

Is apt-get objectively the best package manager?

I want to use whichever one is objectively the best one.

Other urls found in this thread:

manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/xenial/en/man8/apt.8.html
debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch02.en.html#_literal_apt_get_literal_literal_apt_cache_literal_vs_literal_aptitude_literal
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

(doesn't know)
Pacman is a best.

What? Anyway I prefer Tetris

The package manager is just called apt. apt-get is a specific command.

I've never had an issue with apt, but I dislike how "apt-get" and "apt-cache" are preferred separate commands, because apt has a slightly different configuration or something. I wish it was just a single command for everything. You still have to use dpkg for certain things, as well, so there's another command to keep track of separately.

I like pacman/yum/zypper for being a single command that you have to deal with for packages, but I think they all work more-or-less the same with dependencies. As long as you don't install random shit and follow the guidelines of your particular distro, you'll probably be fine.

It's hard to say which is "best" unless you use them all extensively yourself, and even then they keep updating, so it's possible that old issues have been fixed, or that new issues have sprung up.

Install gentoo. Discover portage.

Install Gentoo. Discover waiting for things to compile. (and a much better understanding of how Linux works, and probably a very minimal system)

> preferred separate commands
Both are now integrated as single command named apt. For time being all three are usable but in the future there will be only apt.
manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/xenial/en/man8/apt.8.html

The waiting is limited to this initial install and toasters. Even on toasters it's fine. My old thinkpad handles it fine.

How about keeping packages up-to-date? Doesn't that require recompiling?

Yer, but you don't need to update very often, it's not bleeding edge. Plus apart from your browser there aren't many packages that take a long time to recompile. Also you can just let it do it's thing in the background while you continue using your machine as normal. You only really need to wait for X or whatever, your wm etc to compile. Once they are set up you can compute away while other stuff compiles.

>Doesn't that require recompiling?
Yes
But most packages are relatively quick to compile (except larger packages like firefox or libreoffice, which have binary alternatives to avoid the hassle

Alright, fags, I'm not OP, but I'll try out the Sup Forums OS, but only because
- I like learning how GNU/Linux works
- Portage sounds legitimately cool
- the potential minimalism
- the memes
- the logo.

she looks like some girl i used to fuck ( swedish , lives in malmö )

RTFM

Go slow on the kernel config and get to know your hardware and driver requirements before the install and you should be fine.

DON'T USE GENKERNEL, IT'S FOR PLEBS.

I'd suspect that pacman and portage are better. I mean I'm sure about pacman... Unfortunately they both require you to go with wizard tier distro. If you already are a wizard, or if you plan to become one, then ditch apt

>pacman
>good
nope
>arch
>wizard tier
wrong again.

Objectively, the only one that stands out is Nix.

dnf > yum > apt shit

> no use flags
> no multiple versions in tree
> no slots
> no multilib

No.

portage, no competition

aptitude

I fucking hope carrying about this is a meme

Where does it say that, moron? Here's what I read:

>All features of apt(8) are available in dedicated APT tools like apt- get(8) and apt-cache(8) as well. apt(8) just changes the default value of some options (see apt.conf(5) and specifically the Binary scope).
>So you should prefer using these commands (potentially with some additional options enabled) in your scripts as they keep backward compatibility as much as possible.

I put the link as reference of the command.
As for the other I meant that development will go in favor of apt binary.
It will exist the same way that ifconfig exist even if there is ip.

I found out you don't even need to put -get. sudo apt install works just fine.

>Is apt-get objectively the best package manager?
No. Objectively the best is probably Nix or Guix, maybe portage.

Apt is pretty terrible as far as package managers go

Little known gentoo fact: compiling is something the computer does automatically, requiring no human intervention, and which can run in the background

Add -march=native to your flags.

I haven't used Portage or yum, but I can say without a doubt that pacman is better than apt-get on every account. It's much faster too.

This. Pacman and dnf are pretty good. Apt is shit and portage is an autismal time sink.Any performance gains you may realize from portage are soon eaten up by system maintenance. Run Gentoo if you want but don't pretend you're getting anything special from it aside from some trimmed down packages.

nix is objectively the best

It's probably the worst

Chocolatey

>anything but dnf
Enjoy having no delta packages and having to download 300MB everytime firefox changes one line!

pacman supports deltas

Placebo memes don't count

Wow nice one retard

I have a different question: How do you compare them?

With a not so old computer (5 years old), I used quite a few package managers because I was looking for my ultimate distro. I honestly did not notice any difference. The only thing that can make a difference I can come up with is how they handle if they lose the log file or something. Being a fraction of a second slower is not a big deal I think.

Regardless, I liked pacman for its name and intuitive options. Adding options to the end and adding h to the end when you don't know what to do is quite intuitive I think.

in terms of what

the bets one is the default one

now choose a distro

or dont

it doesn't matter at all

What's the equivalent of #pacman -Syyu gimp in your package manager?

the command uupgrades the system and installs gimp

sudo yum upgrade & sudo yum -y install gimp

Shit


Anyone else with a nice syntax?

Do you know about the alias command?
alias install=sudo pacman -Syyu
alias install=sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get install
alias install=sudo yum upgrade & sudo yum -y install

portage is objectively the best package manager.

It has tons of features that are unequaled by any other manager.

>>not using portage

gtfo my Sup Forums op

Aptitude is much better in terms of dependencies solving

Apt because you can daisy chain it to other stuff so you can update your proprietary software with it.

Depends what you're after in a package manager. If you want convenience and speed, pacman. I fyou want stability and attention to detail, pick portage.

the package manager is called dpkg, apt is a front end for it

apt doesn't even let you see what packages you've installed explicitly.

You do know that you can do genkernel --menuconfig all right? It just automates building the initramfs like this, you can still disable everything you don't need

>he doesnt know rpm

>Is apt-get objectively the best package manager?
Only if it's the only one you know anything about.

Portage is objectively the best

Why use apt-get as of today ?
apt is also there, the loading times are colored and is maybe not as complete as apt-get but we'll hopefully get to the point where it'll be able to fully replace apt-get.

Also, 'apt' its faster to write.

sudo apt update && sudo apt dist-upgrade && sudo apt install gimp

Yep, it's retarded.

Why is she posing like that?
Why is she carrying tan bottle if shes out for a jog?
Can someone explain I am lost here

>calling it apt and not aptitude

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

There are pros and cons to using apt-get/apt-cache vs aptitude.

For example, it's a bad idea to use aptitude to upgrade your system (at least on Debian), because it can "sometimes suggests mass package removals for the system upgrade." I actually personally experienced this when I tried aptitude update && aptitude full-upgrade, which broke things such that I couldn't log in.

debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-reference/ch02.en.html#_literal_apt_get_literal_literal_apt_cache_literal_vs_literal_aptitude_literal

>implying you want to fully upgrade your system every time you install a package

You must be retarded or trolling

>There are "people" on Sup Forums who are yet to discover the simplicity and wonders of slackpkg

please tell us a story about slackware, grandpa!

>Slackware is outdated
I love this meme. The one thing that slackware slackpkg doesn't have that other package managers does is automatic dependency resolution. This isn't a problem because you get full control over what software is installed and aren't forced to use dependencies or versions of dependencies you don't like or want. Other than that, you can install any software that other distros can use.

>doesn't have automatic dependency resolution
...

>outdated
We don't use "outdated" word here, use deprecated.

It doesn't need one, slackware users are going by perfectly fine with doing dependcies themselves. Usually a program only has a few dependencies that you probably already have installed. With slackpkg, you get true control over your OS rather than waiting for a special patched version for your OS or whatever the repos managers want you to use. Slackware is vanilla.

>TRUE control
>oh shit, I need to download these libraries
Sounds more inconvenient than convenient, but it must work fine for you, so w/e.

>been using Arch for +1 year
>pacman has never fucked up my installation

>use ubuntu
>upgrade to new release
>apt fucks up everything

this is the only right answer in a thread full of shitposts

The best package manager is the one that links to the best repositories.

I use apt/ubuntu for the ease of acquiring any package from the ubuntu repositories or PPAs.

I have used Gentoo exclusively for 5 years before I migrated to Debian (and Alpine for containers).
Gentoo is nice for beginners who are still learning the ropes but the disadvantages outweigh the few advantages in the long run.

>- I like learning how GNU/Linux works
You can do that with any distribution. Or just read source code.

Debian does have multiple versions in tree which is an equivalent to slots.
Debian has excellent multilib support.

yes, true control. You have to deal with what the repo managers want you to use and often will modify it or hack together with patches to make it work for the distro. On slackware, you are installing vanilla packages the way the developers intended the software to be used. This is a problem because if there is a bug or something goes wrong the developers can't do anything about it, just whoever modified it. Getting dependencies on slackware really isn't a big inconvenience, slackbuilds has a huge amount of buildscripts and alien bob has other ones that are also great.

pip

No, you can't chose between say 1.2.3 and 1.2.2 easily. Portage allows many versions to be kept inside the same slot (but obviously, one one can be installed).

Debian more or less has slots, they just use a different package name (i.e. qt4, qt5) but it's less clean. I'll give you that.

> not using pong

What's the meaning of -Syyu, I thought it was to upgrade the whole system, I've never really used Pacman to be honest.

You can't analyze women and expect to arrive at a conclusion.

Arch advices for always having an upgraded system so nothing gets broken. Syyu refreshes repos, updates all packages and optionally installs more packages.

portage is bae