Package Manager

aryan

Can anyone could suggest a package manager or repo for Solus, that works?

George

aryan what does it mean works? eopkg is not working?

algent

aryan There are also snap and flatpak.

kyrios

There is only one package manager and it is eopkg and there are only 2 repos shannon (stable) and unstable.

Henry-Wilson

Ah. Well, my view is that, in general, distributions should be chosen based on their repositories and package managers. Solus fits well with this, because aside from Budgie, it exists because of eopkg (correct me if I am wrong). If you prefer apt I recommend debian. yum, fedora, etc. As a general rule, package managers and repositories are the most immutable part of a distribution.

If you mean that the graphical front-end "software center" app is not to your liking, I have to say that I think you are out of luck. I am not aware of options such as synaptic for eopkg, and kyrios Kyrios is absolutely right that there are no third-party repositories you can connect eopkg and by extension the software senter to.

When I wish to install a piece of software in Solus, I acheive the best results by first checking eopkg with eopkg search; if not finding software there, attempting to install from source or binaries; if an ungodly amount of dependencies would be required, installing using flatpak.

DataDrake

Henry-Wilson Hard no. Solus exists because we have different ideas on how to curate, configure, integrate, and optimize the software that makes up the Solus repositories. Budgie exists because many of us prefer a less flashy, aesthetically simple desktop experience that gets out of the way and lets us focus on other things. eopkg exists because Solus needed a package manager. It's a means to an end, not an end. Indeed, we have had plans to replace eopkg for a long time because we have outgrown it. Package managers should (almost) never define a distribution. They are simply tools for fetching and managing locally installed software. Most package managers don't do anything especially different from one another, albeit they may describe those operations differently. The software that they install is was distinguishes one distribution from another, not the package manager itself.

Because they are mentioned by name, I would point out that Flatpak and Snap aren't package managers in the traditional sense. Sure, they install software, but that software is bundled in containers (designed for isolation and security) and come from entirely different sources than the distro they are installed on. They are effectively how /opt was intended to be used.

Henry-Wilson

DataDrake I'm glad to hear directly from you why Solus exists! Apologies for risking the spread of my misconceptions. I have to admit I have never thought of distributions in general in the way you describe! I'll try that philosophy on, though, and see where it takes me.

Out of curiosity, are you looking at other extant package managers (for Solus), or are you considering designing something new?

DataDrake

Henry-Wilson Out of curiosity, are you looking at other extant package managers (for Solus), or are you considering designing something new?

We are writing a new one called sol.

Henry-Wilson

DataDrake Fantastic! My eyes and ears will be out for that. Are you planning on keeping the current rolling structure going? If so, are you planning on making it possible to roll directly from eopkg to sol?

DataDrake

Henry-Wilson The rolling aspect of Solus has nothing to do with the package manager. That's entirely up to when we update and release packages. As far as upgrading from eopkg to sol, yes it will be like any other update.

brent

Henry-Wilson let me add that doing all eopkg functions in the terminal is effective and easy.
When I first started with this distro I did not want the moon, but I wanted what I was used to. When I couldn't have that I learned to 1) be harmonious with similar/new softwares that accomplished the same and 2) have a really healthy respect for how this repo is curated and kept secure, and the philosophy behind it.
Dig it🙂

Henry-Wilson

DataDrake Thanks for the clarification!
brent I think I came here with the same hopes. I've been around the block enough times to know that I'll always need to get some packages externally, and to know how that's done. And yes, I also really like the Solus repositories, and the command-line functionality of eopkg. The repos are intelligently curated (not just a glob of whatever can be added like certain repos rhyming with debian), and the package manager is, by-and-large, efficient.

brent

Henry-Wilson The repos are intelligently curated (not just a glob of whatever can be added like certain repos rhyming with debian)

I gotta be honest. I haven't been around the block in Linux, but all my Debian excursions were unsettling. The redundancies were annoying (87 ways to skin a cat when all you needed was a handful), but more to what you are saying: NOWHERE in any Flavour did I get any warning or literature about which repos were legit, recommended, not recommended, risky, experimental, developer only, nothing. Just half a dozen repos or more. Simply do a package search, say Y/N to the repo source, install, the end. I was likely inexperienced with gathering that knowledge. But that said, dpkg, yum, even pacman and others I could not distinguish from eopkg b/c I didn't use the UI's anyway. I agree that software centre GUI is hit and miss and frustrating on occasion and I look forward to it's replacement sol..
...that said I'll still use the terminal for sol out of habit🙂

Brucehankins

brent NOWHERE in any Flavour did I get any warning or literature about which repos were legit, recommended, not recommended, risky, experimental, developer only, nothing. Just half a dozen repos or more.

Have you heard the good word of Arch and the AUR? 🤣 🤣 🤣

JoshStrobl

brent The Software Center is not the same as the package manager. While yes, the package manager is leveraged in the Software Center, I will be working on the rewrite independently from the development of sol, it'll be modeled on a plugin-oriented architecture and I will be working on the flatpak and snap plugins first.

Just have a backlog of existing work to do before I can get around to it.

Henry-Wilson

brent
This is the main issue with debian (which, by the way, I love despite its flaws). Its repos apporach the status of being a giant blob of every open-source free/libre piece of software that exists and meets certain standards, which I will be the first to tell you has its uses (they have, I believe, achieved their goal of becoming a universal operating system), but can be inconvenient and confusing. The other main problem (which Solus also avoids!!) is that Debian is a bit slow to adopt new hardware drivers. Working with fancy new processors, GPUs, even wifi chips on Debian can be a pain. Not so much here (in my experience).

I really like the Solus repos. They have given me the most convenient and consistent linux system on modern hardware of all the distributions I've used.

aryan CorvusRuber there is just the littlest bit of difference. There are a number of third-party packages that can be easily accessed through the software center, such as google chrome. These would have to be downloaded, then built, then installed, then manually updated if one uses command-line eopkg, while the software center will handle all of these processes for you.

Now, I have to use google, but I still use eopkg rather than the software center, because I am a creature of the command line. This article might be of use if these third party packages are important to you: https://getsol.us/articles/software/third-party/en/

aryan

JoshStrobl what's the difference of software in eopkg and the Software Centre

brent

JoshStrobl Just have a backlog of existing work to do before I can get around to it.

I will gladly forego all package manager business, clears throat, as you deliever us a new file manager🙂!

CorvusRuber

aryan
None. The Software Center is simply a graphical frontend for eopkg.