Package manager vs Software manager

Discussion in 'all things UNIX' started by act8192, Oct 31, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. act8192

    act8192 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    1,273
    Learning Linux Mint v13

    I googled all over, can't find a clear description :(
    Both have large lists. One of them has an indicator what's installed, and what's suported. How do I use this knowledge (or lack thereof) to zoom in on something I might want to install? How can I tell a safe package from some other since there's no indication where these things come from. Or what belongs together, when one decides to uninstall something.
     
  2. mack_guy911

    mack_guy911 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Posts:
    2,677
    they are pretty much same at core both do same work and one will work at a time

    ie mint you can install software 3 ways by default

    by software manager (same as ubuntu software center)

    2nd by package manager (which is also called synaptic package manager)

    3rd way command line way

    sudo apt-get install XYZ

    also i recommended you to read this basic document file of linux mint :))

    http://www.linuxmint.com/documentation.php


    diffrence is on usability package manager(synaptic package manager) you need to give your password 1st then install also its has advance features ....etc

    while mint software manager is pretty easy and same as ubuntu software manager

    here sypnatic

    https://help.ubuntu.com/community/SynapticHowto

    its very old but its give you and idea about package manager

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUzm7b9anX8

    www.debianadmin.com/simple-package-management-with-synaptic-package-manager-in-ubuntu.html
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2012
  3. inka

    inka Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Posts:
    406
    You shouldn't expect to encounter any "unsafe" (malicious) apps listed within the mint "softwre center". Nor should you expect to find any unsafe/malicious apps listed within synaptic package manager (a utility common to many debian-derived distros), unless you add extra repositories (beyond what mint has perconfigured) to your sources.list

    I recommend synaptic, with the caveat that you edit its preferences settings ~~ ensure that "consider recommended packages as dependencies" is UNchecked. In the other app (mint "Software Manager") IIRC there's no means to make a similar election in order to avoid the prospect of having extra junk downloaded along with an application. Junk? I mean stuff like extra font packages you might not (probably don't) want... which wind up NOT being automatically removed when you try/uninsatall the app they were "recommended" for (accumulating, and bloating the size of your backup dataset).

    Regardless of installation route... at time of uninstall, you may wind up with some no-longer-used (on your system, were only used by the app you just uninstalled). Down the road, you might want to install "debfoster" and/or "deborpan" or "gtkorphan" and check what apparent leftovers have accumulated. If you do, keep in mind "better safe than sorry" ~~ better to keep any package listed as a current "stray/orphan" unless you're certain (web search, post in mint forums to ask) its removal won't cause problems.
     
  4. Wild Hunter

    Wild Hunter Former Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Posts:
    1,375
    All that to correctly uninstall an app? Looks very complicated.
     
  5. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,780
    It's no different than Windows really, since an uninstall of anything can leave stray remnants in either OS. I personally never bother cleaning anything up unless there is some kind of problem...
     
  6. Wild Hunter

    Wild Hunter Former Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Posts:
    1,375
    It's different. On Windows, there are thousands of free portable applications that don't leave anything behind. And there are many user-friendly tools like Revo Uninstaller, that can help automatizing the uninstall process and/or offering easy step-by-step instructions when one decides to completely uninstall something.
     
  7. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,780
    Even so, I honestly think one is better off in that regard in linux. It's generally pretty clean, no registry nonsense, and so on. In Windows, even with automated tools, there is room for error, and more chance that "stuff" is hanging around, or registry entries remaining, and so on. I don't know.. I honestly never worry about uninstalling something in either OS. But I think one is better off in linux overall...
     
  8. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,136
    sudo apt-get --purge remove in debian or sudo pacman -Rns in arch removes everything and anything related to the package and leaves no orphaned files behind not that they do any harm in Linux. Also autoremove will remove any non essential packages. There is GUI for them as well.
     
  9. Wild Hunter

    Wild Hunter Former Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Posts:
    1,375
    Of course you think "one is better off in that regard in linux", that's a common effect of continuous FOSS propaganda affecting vulnerable geeks' brains. :D Many Linux cheerleaders and FOSS cultists are like the old communist soviets, they try to 1. hide whatever disadvantage Linux/FOSS has and 2. silence whoever has the balls to point them out (how? Using and abusing the millenarian art of trolling.). Firstly, Linux doesn't have a registry so of course there is no registry nonsense in it. The junk in Linux comes in other form: dynamic libraries/packages dependency. It's very ugly and it's like the old "DLL Hell" problem that got solved in Windows at the start of this century. Linux uses per-user config files, which can also accumulate in different user accounts over time because there are no available tools to reliably clean them. Now, on Windows, there are several options of registry cleaners being continually developed to reliably detect and remove registry junk, with options of doing automatic backups as well. And, in recent versions, Windows goes even further: it tries to create virtual versions of the registry for new apps, in an attempt to eliminate registry junk before it gets created. Point for Windows. Secondly, there aren't many options of portable apps for Linux. On Windows, if one is radical and wants to use only portable apps, he can - there are portable alternatives for everything and even very complex software like commercial game titles can easily get a portable version with the help of software like VMWare ThinApp and others. Again, point for Windows.
     
  10. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,780
    I'm certainly no expert in linux, so I can't argue with all your points there. I am just basing what I say on actual experience.. I've run both linux and Win for long periods of time, and I have to say that I've never experienced a gunked up linux system, but I have with Windows. I've seen Windows systems to screwed up from installs and uninstalls that the only real option left was a reformat and reinstall of the OS. I have never seen that with Linux.

    I'll leave all the technical and theoretical arguments to the linux experts.. :)
     
  11. Wild Hunter

    Wild Hunter Former Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Posts:
    1,375
    Third-party software can and do more on Windows. More alternatives, more needs, more options and more features. Over time, you may try several different alternatives of complex software that do risky things like security suites. These things can completely screw a system and, mostly because of their self-defense modules, they can be hard to totally uninstall (this is remedied or mitigated by the fact that most security vendors now maintain specialized uninstaller tools to help in failure scenarios). Linux distributions tend to come with all the commonly needed software installed, and very complex software like security suites with their self-defense components aren't needed at all, as Linux home users don't usually interest attackers (usually, they are too few to justify the costs of developing unique creative techniques to attack them). So, less chances of software in general screwing up the system.
     
  12. 'apt-get remove PKG' followed by 'apt-get autoremove' will remove PKG, things that depend on PKG, and PKG's dependencies, as long as said dependencies are not required by anything else still installed (and are not flagged as manually installed). e.g. say you remove suckyapp, and it depends on libsucky and libapp. libsucky is only needed by suckyapp, but libapp is needed by Firefox or something. In that case autoremove will only get rid of suckyapp and libsucky.

    apt-get is pretty good at handling this stuff. Every once in a while it leaves something to be pruned out manually; no big deal IMO.

    (BTW, the '--purge' option is to remove debconf configuration stuff as well.)

    pacman's equivalent is 'pacman -Rscn'. It is even better at this stuff than apt-get - I have never seen it leave behind anything.

    Some RPM distros have rpmorphan available, others have a Yum plugin that does the same thing; personally I would recommend avoiding either of those at all costs, as they tend to unwittingly remove essential core packages. Mageia's urpme is more acceptable, but I still wouldn't rely on it. RPM and anything related to it tends toward being a nuisance IMHO.

    I will finish this post with an indication that recursive package removal tools like apt-get's autoremove are really nonessential. Other than reducing the size of your system backups, or freeing up space on a crowded partition, I can't think of any genuinely good reason to recursively remove stuff. Most of the value seems to be in the sense of cleanliness that it gives obsessive-compulsive nerds (such as myself :D ).
     
  13. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,136
    FOSS propaganda...........LOL! how can free agitprop really, isn't that an Oxymoron, if its anyone thats peddled ordinary into extraordinary thanks to its financial clout its MICROSHAFT and no one else. :D Why even bother with 1% desktop share and attack FOSS, its no competition at all to the allmighty and chosen one aka Wiindows, the quintessential Manna from heaven. :D
     
  14. Wild Hunter

    Wild Hunter Former Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Posts:
    1,375
  15. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,136
    and it can be surreptitious as being HUNTER meaning anti FOSS. FOSS don't need propaganda really, it has nothing to gain, no money to make.
     
  16. Wild Hunter

    Wild Hunter Former Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Posts:
    1,375
    I'm not anti FOSS; I'm simply honest and I don't appreciate the extremism, ignorance and dishonesty (that I got used to see) coming from some FOSS supporters who truly are "anti-property" (those fellows who try their best to demonize successful proprietary software companies such as Microsoft, for example). These people do a disservice for the world with their behavior. And lol at "no money to make". There are ways to monetize on FOSS. Besides, I'm not against propaganda, except when it's abusive & mixed with extremism, ignorance and dishonesty.
     
  17. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,136

    The traits you describe in the first few lines define MS to the point, nothing more to say :D MS is so successful that 95% of supercomps run that, now thats HONESTY with a capital H ;)
     
  18. Wild Hunter

    Wild Hunter Former Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Posts:
    1,375
    "Nothing more to say", I see that all the time. Make an easy insult and run away without elaborating. Classical.
     
  19. Wild Hunter

    Wild Hunter Former Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Posts:
    1,375
    Supercomputing capabilities have historically been limited to large universities, government agencies and giant research-oriented private businesses, while Microsoft is really interested in the bottom 500,000 computing users. That's why Microsoft is taking supercomputing to the cloud and enabling common users to access compute cycles -- lots of them, as in, supercomputer-class performance -- via its Azure cloud computing service.
     
  20. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,136

    OMG thats a Billion dollar statement right there :D IBM, NASA, HP better watch out now.
     
  21. Wild Hunter

    Wild Hunter Former Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Posts:
    1,375
    And among Microsoft Windows Azure publicly biggest customers, we can find Apple, Pixar, Ebay, Travelocity, Boeing, EasyJet...
     
  22. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,136
    Of course whatever you say Effendi......us crooked dishonest FOSS thugs dis lord and salt of the earth MS on daily basis here on a LINUX related thread :D
     
  23. Wild Hunter

    Wild Hunter Former Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Posts:
    1,375
    Yep. I didn't bring Microsoft or Windows to this thread. Post 5 did it.
     
  24. chronomatic

    chronomatic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Posts:
    1,343
    Please. I have never seen any configuration file clutter on Linux. My /home directory looks the same now as it did a year ago.
     
  25. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,136

    I have a old dual CPU PC running gentoo with no clutter anywhere and this has been running since 1999.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.