Re: oh no something is definitly wrong adieu debian.
On Tue, 2013-08-27 at 12:03 -0500, Conrad Nelson wrote:
> On 08/27/2013 12:00 PM, Conrad Nelson wrote:
> > On 08/27/2013 10:22 AM, berenger.morel@neutralite.org wrote:
> >> Le 27.08.2013 17:07, Conrad Nelson a écrit :
> >>> Debian's other problem is this need to split packages. A lot. Debian
> >>> likes to brag about having a HUGE repository, but when you actually
> >>> look at it, it's actually an AVERAGE repository made "bigger" by the
> >>> fact that when you install software, despite the fact it downloads and
> >>> installs up to 12 packages for the same thing it really is basically
> >>> just ONE package. I don't actually see the purpose in why Debian has
> >>> to split its packages dozens of ways especially when you still end up
> >>> having to install them all anyway. Someone explain this to me.
> >>
> >>
> >> I agree on most of your post, except that part.
> >>
> >> Can you please provide package's names which should be united?
> >>
> >> Of course, there are the ".*$", ".*-dev$", ".*-doc$" and ".*-dbg$"
> >> packages, which could be merged. For -dev, ok, since text does not
> >> take a lot of space. Still, most users does not need the headers of
> >> programming libraries, so that separation makes the system smaller,
> >> and reduce network load.
> >> For -dbg, it' of course a good thing to not merge them: debugging
> >> symbols takes a lot of space.
> >> Then, there are -doc packages, too. I think the reason is the same:
> >> most users does not need them, so why should they install it?
> >>
> >> Now, if you mean that packages are too atomic, like, for example,
> >> libpython2.7 which depends on libpython2.7-stdlib... I just want to
> >> say that it's exactly why I dislike python's softwares: they usually
> >> depends on lot of things which I do not think are necessary. Debian
> >> simply shows that. I have no other examples than python's ones here,
> >> so provide some, so that I could argue better :) (because that
> >> argument is really poor: I do not like python... XD )
> >>
> > Oh, no, I think the -dev, -dbg, etc stuff SHOULD be split.
> >
> > I'll go by example: The nvidia driver. In Arch it's easy to install,
> > there's not a lot of packages directly involved in the driver. Just
> > nvidia and nvidia-utils, as it should be.
> >
> > Debian SPLITS these two packages about two dozen different ways, with
> > names that often confuse me into thinking one package is actually the
> > driver. They COULD be the driver, but just installing those packages
> > and trying to configure for nVidia doesn't seem to work for Xorg.
> >
> > I found out that pretty much the only way to install the nVidia driver
> > is the dkms package, which seems unneeded for users with the stock
> > kernel. Shouldn't Debian have a PREBUILT nVidia module for their stock
> > kernel? The end result is that installing this driver and configuring
> > it is unnecessarily messy and complicated due in no small part to the
> > fact you install at least half a dozen packages all of which look like
> > they're the driver itself.
> >
> > I can understand having a dkms package for custom kernels, though.
> >
> > I don't think I can explain the splitting thing that bugs me well
> > enough. Just that I think that Debian's claims to have a HUGE
> > repository are maybe a little dishonest when if they actually reduced
> > all their packages to what they are at their source, it's much smaller
> > than what they claim. Maybe a better metric would actually be about
> > actual quantity of SOFTWARE AS A WHOLE over individual packages. But
> > by that metric I daresay I've found more software in Arch's
> > repositories + the AUR than in Debian.
> I'm not really happy with my example or explanation. Short answer is it
> is, indeed, too atomic, the way they split packages. I'd only split
> packages in cases where whatever is split off can be replaced
> completely, otherwise the split seems pointless (Exception being stuff
> liek -doc or -dev or -dbg. Not everyone is a developer.)
You'll find packages in AUR that are split too. The linux-rt PKGBUILD
does split linux-rt into linux-rt-docs, -headers and the kernel image
package ;).
Reply to: