Ubuntu installers?

[Owen Thomas]

On Sat, 7 Jan 2023 at 20:40, M. Fioretti <mfioretti at nexaima.net> wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 07, 2023 17:41:39 PM +1100, Owen Thomas wrote:
>
> >     > However, it would be excellent if Ubuntu took hold of one way of
> >     > installing software and eviscerated all the others.
> >
> >     Owen,
> >
> >     I already said I do share your pain, but unless I missed something in
> >     the previous posts, what you ask above is half impossible, half
> >     irrelevant.
> >
> >
> > Impossible is a word I might be able to appreciate. Irrelevant?
>
> yes, irrelevant, as in "it would not change anything relevant anyway"
>

The adjective "impossible" sounds more appropriate to me because your
complaint that it won't change anything relevant appeals to the sense that
it is impossible to change. What things of relevance are, by this quality
alone, untouchable to the possibility of reducing the package manager
burden? Are there technical considerations that I am unaware of?

Perhaps asking Ubuntu to advocate a single package manager may be aiming
too low; perhaps it should be Linux that takes on this responsibility? Can
that be done from Ubuntu?


>
> **If** what you have in mind is a single front-end, that is ONE window
> or CLI tool from which end users install everything all in the same
> way, without even knowing if the software that will be downloaded is
> snap, .deb or anything else:
>
> that would feel good, I agree. But sooner or later it would very
> likely cause conflicts and make them less visible/harder to solve,
> because you would be installing "blindly" stuff that was
> compiled/configured in many, possible conflicting ways.
>

The conflicting ways only come about because there are multiple package
managers, none of which have been indicated as the preferred one.


>
> But never mind, because all the rest of your email:
>
> > Why not consider bundling  a single package manager from a primary
> > distribution; one that is available from a bog standard download site
> that
> > anyone interested in Ubuntu would likely first encounter, say https://
> > ubuntu.com/download?
> >
> > A caveat given at the bog standard download site could explain that the
> package
> > manager included may only cover a subset of applications available to
> Ubuntu,
> > and if the interested potential user wants to include other package
> managers
> > then maybe they should be directed to another site with a distribution
> that
> > bundles other package managers as well.
> >
> > I would think that package managers are software like any other. Can't
> one
> > therefore install another package manager through one they already have
> > installed? Why not then just include a single package manager in the
> basic
> > distribution, and leave the question of installing others to the user in
> this
> > way?
>
> is EXACTLY the already existing, ridiculous mess in which I have been
> living in for years: being forced to use multiple package manager, all
> without any clue of what the others are doing, and no way to work
> together.
>

You might still have to use multiple package managers for a while until it
catches on generally that one particular package manager has been chosen by
the community to be used preferentially. Over time, why shouldn't this
confusion and frustration settle as more software is deployed using the
single chosen method? To me, it sounds like what everyone would want. Why
wouldn't everyone want this? Why would it be so hard to suggest an option
to everyone and exercise patience while everyone slowly gets the thing that
everyone wants?


> No offense meant, really, but please do not propose as the solution
> what is just a different packaging of THE original problem. I already
> wrote every further explanation I could add here elsewhere, so it's
> better to repost that link once more, than burdening the whole list
> with pasted text that many may not want to receive:
>
> https://stop.zona-m.net/2022/01/the-sorry-sorry-state-of-linux-packaging/
>

No offence has been taken; you seem passionate about this topic, and it is
one that I am getting fed up with too. Perhaps everyone is getting fed up
with it; we may have reached a critical mass where action can now follow.

Either that, or things go on a little more. Perhaps Ubuntu will become a
victim to this package manager malaise because an immovable wall of
cynicism has descended, and nothing more can be done. Perhaps (referring to
my earlier suggestion) if Linux will not take this initiative, then maybe
Ubuntu should, thereby putting its house into order before the rest of
them. Maybe they will follow.

Just produce a distribution that has a single package manager (perhaps APT
is a very good candidate - I don't know) and leave it open to the user to
install others if it suits them. Make a press release that Ubuntu is fed up
with the confusion inspired by supporting multiple package managers, and so
is distributing its bog standard version with a single one that has been
nominated somehow. Maybe the Ubuntu developer community could make a
collective statement saying they will not contribute to future development
of other package managers. Things like this would send clear signals to
other users that people who could do something about this problem are
actively trying. Perhaps this will induce others to join the bandwagon.

Maybe do some research on the topic of the most popular and most functional
package managers. Perhaps conduct a survey asking which package manager
users most like using. Something surely can be done, and others that are
reading this message surely see the need.

I want to get on with my things. I don't want to be distracted by minutiae
that should be irrelevant to me. If this has resonance with Ubuntu, then I
think finding a single package manager format and sticking to it is the
right thing to do.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20230107/085aad08/attachment.html>