|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 11:07 am
I've recently installed Smart, know that it is said to be the best software manager you can get that is free, free like beer by the open source standards, It is said that smart is the best because it can handle almost any kind of download source, and it is also said to be better at handling dependicies. The thing is it doesn't really seem any different than yum in the way it works. I just want to know if anyone knows of something, or found something, that can back up this claim?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:27 pm
Smart gains minimal points for being modular, then loses almost all of its points for selecting on its own which packages to install and which to not install. Then again, I don't update my packages because I don't get new things anyway, so my opinion may not be the best.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:30 pm
I'm just wondering if its overrated or not and so far that is one vote overrated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:34 pm
vendion I'm just wondering if its overrated or not and so far that is one vote overrated I personally don't like anything that does things I don't explicitly tell it to do. So I just think its plain bad, as well as overrated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:06 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:15 pm
Smart is a package manager/updater, for as far as i know only for the most common distro's of Linux. You may be able to find if it supports more by googling it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:15 pm
I've never heard of smart but it sounds absolutely terrible. Every single Linux distro wants the "perfect" package manager but I just don't think it's that easy. Even official sites have screwy packages and this package manager is trying to mess with rpm files et cetera? I'll look up some actual info this week but I certainly don't trust it at the moment.
I currently use Zenwalk's netpkg (it's pretty much for that distro only), it's great with dependencies and improving in usability but the official repositories have barely anything in them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:42 am
Whoops, it's not as bad as I thought. I personally prefer a simpler package manager though.
With smart if you mix mirrors it could cause trouble because of the way it does dependancies? Does it auto-convert rpm/deb/tgz et cetera, that would be more trouble if you're not manually converting and checking them?
And I have no idea how long it takes them to fix bugs?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2007 12:37 pm
Well the thing about smart is if you decide not to use mirrors then you use channels, works the same but only has up dates for one or two packages per channel, then it can deal with dependancies better (or so it says). The down side of using channels is the 200+ different download sources. Its a pain to set up, but it handles any package type with using channels, i have not tried setting up mirrors with it though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
