Are you satisfied with Paludis

Message

zxy · Post by **zxy** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 2:47 am

After seeing many people tried out paludis (the portage alternative), I was thinking that it would be cool to get some feedbeck from us (users) in a statistical form.

So here it is. If you tried or are still using paludis you can choose the above answers to the question.

To be fair, the links (in alphabetical order

):

If you post a reason why would be

cool too.

--- edit ---

For both of the choices I meant as the main package manager (not that you totaly uninstall the other - what you also can do of course

)

Phenax · Post by **Phenax** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 3:19 am

I'm at Portage right now.

I must say, Paludis is an amazingly good package manager. It's better than Portage in most aspects IMO.
I'm just going to wait until it's more developed in the sense that more programs will adapt to Paludis. I know that there a lot of drop-in replacements and small patches to get a lot of these utilities to work with it.. Programs like Udept and Genlop I've just gotten too comfortable with. The lack of configuration updating tools, that are integrated with Portage (cfg-update, meh..), as well as other things just keep me swayed away from it.

I'm likely to come back when Paludis can go stand-alone without regretting vital utilities along the way.

zxy · Post by **zxy** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 3:23 am

I find paludis faster, with better repository support (i like repo default conf and sync options), better conf files, bashrc is a fantastic Idea, and one more thing the HOOKS are my favorite. Many other things is improved, too, but I can't remember them all right now (I might edit this thing later).

luqas · Post by **luqas** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 4:00 am

I will stay with paludis. I find its configuration and error handling more intuitive than portage, but at the same time I find portage's overlay support much easier (especially with svn overlays) which is minor in my eyes compared to the error handling / configuration.

Kenji Miyamoto · Post by **Kenji Miyamoto** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 4:32 am

Despite a few rough edges, I'll likely stay with Paludis. The few problems I've seen are just due to its young age, and bother me very little.

Shadow Skill · Post by **Shadow Skill** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 4:49 am

I'm sticking with Paludis, its fast doesn't get in the way anymore than portage did and I can easily create package sets to let me update my boxes in chunks great for insanely long install o upgrade operations.

cdiesch · Post by **cdiesch** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 6:18 am

I like paludis for being more stringent and for the overlay support.
In order to get it working with sometimes broken ebuilds, I would consider it helpful, if the EAPI masking result would provide more details about why not being compatible.

truc · Post by **truc** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:32 am

Phenax wrote:Programs like Udept and Genlop I've just gotten too comfortable with. The lack of configuration updating tools, that are integrated with Portage (cfg-update, meh..), as well as other things just keep me swayed away from it.

I don't know for udept, but, you can use qlop with paludis, (it has been re-written specially for paludis log

), and, you can now use etc-paludis which is in paludis-extras overlay. I'm personnally still using etc-update and dispatch-conf which come with portage

krisse · Post by **krisse** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:06 am

At the moment, I run paludis -- and if it doesn't work, emerge. I've run into some packages lately that doesn't seem to build with paludis. So at the moment, I think un-paluding portage would mean trouble for me.

That said, I do still try with paludis first.

I'd want a "BOTH" option to the poll.

--------------

I like the speed.

I like the news-thing --- or rather, the possibility of it. So far, I haven't had any news items to read. ...But then, I'm guessing it's because the repos I use (no paludis specific) wouldn't utilize that, huh?

I like the idea of it being more strict --- although I guess that's what makes the ebuilds brake.

I do not like it's warning of USE "* -*" being unsafe. (I've tried without it now, and I can't say I see the benefits. The list of flags isn't that much shorter, and so on.)

CryoGen · Post by **CryoGen** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:31 pm

Paludis is my main package manager.

Kenji Miyamoto wrote: The few problems I've seen are just due to its young age, and bother me very little.

+1 or caused by bad ebuilds

[/code]

Janax · Post by **Janax** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 2:49 pm

I've been using Paludis for a couple of months now. The speed and flexibility for repositories, etc. really have made tinkering around with it worthwhile!

Shadow Skill · Post by **Shadow Skill** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 6:17 pm

One thing that really annoys me about Portage and Paludis is the way they treat the ask option Paludis doesn't have one at all by default and the last time I used the ask hook (When it was still in sys-apps rather than app-paludis which appears to be broken last I tried to install it.) it actually defaulted enter to yes when that key should not be defaulting to anything! (Having an option to change this behavior to whatever one liked through a config file would solve the problem.) Portage is almost as bad given that there is no flag to turn off ask and assume yes making it impossible to make portage default to prompting without creating a seperate command for emerge to account either for the prompt or the (stupid) default behavior that assumes everything is great.

The strangest thing is that people will say that these two programs are meant to be non-interactive yet without hooks or aliases you pretty much have to entre every command twice which is actually far more interactive than defaulting to a prompt on install, remove, and upgrade operations would be.

Paapaa · Post by **Paapaa** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 6:39 pm

I wonder why those who voted NO switched back to portage. They left no comments. There is always the suspicion that they never even tried Paludis in the first place...

ashtophet · Post by **ashtophet** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 7:43 pm

I'm staying with paludis. As stated before main arguments to me were the more than good 3rd party repository support, the great great (did I say it was great?) /etc/paludis/bashrc and one feature I've been long waiting: --dl-reinstall-scm weekly, license filtering and, of course, speed compared to portage. I'm sticking to this package mangler and have no issues during the couple of months I've been using it exclusively (other than some 3rd ebuilds with plain easy fixing). Paludis is definitely a great app.

That was a second round switch. On my first try I returned back to portage because of my lack of time dealing with 3rd party ebuilds which didn't follow paludis strictness.

cheers.

Shadow Skill · Post by **Shadow Skill** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:12 pm

Paapaa wrote:I wonder why those who voted NO switched back to portage. They left no comments. There is always the suspicion that they never even tried Paludis in the first place...

I wonder about that too.

Sachankara · Post by **Sachankara** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:51 pm

Shadow Skill wrote:
Paapaa wrote:I wonder why those who voted NO switched back to portage. They left no comments. There is always the suspicion that they never even tried Paludis in the first place...
I wonder about that too.

Perhaps because they don't really have anything useful to say?

I tried it and I didn't like it. Happy now?

Paapaa · Post by **Paapaa** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:02 pm

Sachankara wrote:I tried it and I didn't like it. Happy now?

Well...no

I mean, why didn't you like it? Did Paludis br0ke your system? Was there something you couldn't accomplish with it? Didn't you like the UI? Was there something that Paludis alternatives did better that it? What version you tried? "I don't like it" is probably the most fruitless answer ever...

Phenax · Post by **Phenax** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:08 pm

truc wrote:
Phenax wrote:Programs like Udept and Genlop I've just gotten too comfortable with. The lack of configuration updating tools, that are integrated with Portage (cfg-update, meh..), as well as other things just keep me swayed away from it.
I don't know for udept, but, you can use qlop with paludis, (it has been re-written specially for paludis log ), and, you can now use etc-paludis which is in paludis-extras overlay. I'm personnally still using etc-update and dispatch-conf which come with portage

Interesting, when I have some spare time I'll look into it. (Might even have some tonight!)

Conan · Post by **Conan** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:36 pm

The reason I switched back from paludis is because Ciaran is designing a package manager to fit an ideal situation, not one that will fit every situation. He is using the devmanual (which he wrote) and paludis (which he wrote) to bring change to gentoo. I don't feel comfortable being at the whim of someone who does this. At least with portage I know the developers there won't break things on a whim because "the ebuilds are doing things wrong," they will try to fix the ebuilds.

jonnevers · Post by **jonnevers** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 11:44 pm

Shadow Skill wrote:One thing that really annoys me about Portage and Paludis is the way they treat the ask option Paludis doesn't have one at all by default and the last time I used the ask hook (When it was still in sys-apps rather than app-paludis which appears to be broken last I tried to install it.) it actually defaulted enter to yes when that key should not be defaulting to anything! (Having an option to change this behavior to whatever one liked through a config file would solve the problem.) Portage is almost as bad given that there is no flag to turn off ask and assume yes making it impossible to make portage default to prompting without creating a seperate command for emerge to account either for the prompt or the (stupid) default behavior that assumes everything is great.

The strangest thing is that people will say that these two programs are meant to be non-interactive yet without hooks or aliases you pretty much have to entre every command twice which is actually far more interactive than defaulting to a prompt on install, remove, and upgrade operations would be.

You are misinterpreting what 'interactive' is. The -a flag (ask) for portage is not interactivity but I do agree that it's default answer should be "no" or why else would you use the ask flag. (if you wanted it to default yes, you'd just have run it without the -a flag anyway...)

Real interactivity would be provided by something like 'porthole' or another GUI on top of portage.

zxy · Post by **zxy** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:40 am

@Shadow Skill
@jonnevers
and others. The ask hook is being upgraded. Now it is in testing phase for at least a few hours more, but may be a day, too. Things you wanted and other options will be accessible through a configuration file from now on.

Thanks for giving a boost, as this was being worked on for some time now.

-------------------
About not giving a reson for switching back

I would create a pool of a different kind if I could. It would be requested to obtain a reason for switching back to portage, but the forums do not support it AFAIK.

During some time, it will be pretty obvious how many people do not give a reason when they vote, so I will add that results to the first post (I think I can)

--------------------
@jonnevers I think a gui was in the making by ciaranm some time ago. I don't know what is the status now.

micr0c0sm · Post by **micr0c0sm** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 4:50 am

Switched at .10.x, sticking with it for the forseeable future.

The best thing about paludis is its dependency handling - FINALLY I can try out programs, knowing full well if I don't like it and want to uninstall paludis cleans my computer 100%. (<3 --uninstall-unused).

The speed, config files and repository support are icing on the cake.

There are some other neat features but those are the biggest reasons I'm sticking with paludis.

krisse · Post by **krisse** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:32 am

Shadow Skill wrote:the ask option Paludis doesn't have one at all

I missed that option, too, the first hour or so. Then I realized that I only wanted it because portage took such a god-awful time to calculate dependencies and such. ---That is, with portage, the use of "-a" was preferred before "-p", because "-p" would mean calculating the dependencies twice.

I could have paludis calculating deps three times, and it'd still be faster than one go with portage. Thus, I haven't really got a need for "-a" anymore. But that's just me, of course.

------

Other things a poster reminded me of, that I like:

--dl-reinstall-scm weekly --- Wonderful!

Filtering by license. I don't care *that much* about licensing, but appreciate that the filtering option is there, nevertheless.

truc · Post by **truc** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 8:15 am

jonnevers wrote:(if you wanted it to default yes, you'd just have run it without the -a flag anyway...)

This is just wrong, most of the time I don't need to cancel, but sometimes, I'm not satisfied (want to change use flags or something), then I type 'n' to cancel the whole thing. Why would I want to run it twice, when just pressing 'enter' is enough most of the time?

Paapaa · Post by **Paapaa** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:18 pm

Conan wrote:The reason I switched back from paludis is because Ciaran is designing a package manager to fit an ideal situation, not one that will fit every situation. He is using the devmanual (which he wrote) and paludis (which he wrote) to bring change to gentoo. I don't feel comfortable being at the whim of someone who does this. At least with portage I know the developers there won't break things on a whim because "the ebuilds are doing things wrong," they will try to fix the ebuilds.

Interesting. I have the exact opposite opinion, however. I think it is a great thing that finally someone tries to set up rules and standardize the whole thing (ie. the ability to use some other package manager than Portage). How on earth can that be a bad idea? And what exactly has Paludis broke?

Are you satisfied with Paludis

Would (did) you switch back to portage after installing paludis?

Are you satisfied with Paludis