2008/5/30 Hemmann, Volker Armin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Freitag, 30. Mai 2008, Duncan wrote: > > > I've not done paludis due to its lack of binary package support. Even > > tho I'm running only a single computer > > there is another reason not to use paludis: > > you can't go back. > > At least not easily. > > With pkgcore you can switch between pkgcore and portage 'on the fly'. > emerge > app a, pmerge app b, emerge app c. > > The config files are not touched.
with paludis the portage config files are not touched. paludis has its own config dir where to install its personal config files. i use portage regulary to compile with ABI=x86 which paludis has some problems with and sometimes goes a little mad. > > Paludis on the other hand can only described with 'vendor lock in' > and 'gratuitous incompatibilty'. And don't forget that it is slow. > on what base you say it's slow?! i'm using it because on my system is tons of times faster; i really assure you that is faster in discovering deps and it finds them in the right way at least. i'm now rebuilding a new clean system and with portage i've got problems building it since portage quite some time has not selected the right dependency and thus builds fail. with paludis for now this hasn't yet happened. to not speak of the continue option: with portage after a package compile/install fail portage stops and doesn't continue. after you do a --resume skipfirst most of the times the build will completely fail because of deps not met and then there would be no way to resume the actual build. paludis has the continue-on-errors option with cases like if package is independent of the one failed (useful in new sytem builds), if requirements not met (useful in world updates) and also it gives a list of packages. you could edit the list and set S instead of P whenever you'd like to skip a specific package. That it also requires a shitload of dependencies and installs more crap than > portage and pkgcore combined doesn't make it better. > on this i can agree with you. i'd just want to show one thig, though: on the new system i've installed the weekly stages from funtoo, rebuild the system with emerge -e system, rebuild again the system with emerge -e system and my personal use flags and then build xorg-server with portage. after that, since i wanted kde4-svn i installed paludis and, miracle, the only real dep needed for me there was boost. it seems that now the deps aren't so huge anymore. anyway that it takes a big deal of time every update is right (2,5 hours with inram compilation). At a last point: don't forget WHO is behind paludis - some of the most > abusive > persons gentoo has ever seen. The same people responsible for most > problems. > > Abusive, agressive, searching for stuff that is not covered by rules, > behave > like a rabid ape until everything is covered by rules, suffocating gentoo > and > then turn into rule nazis and game the system. Yes, this people are behind > paludis - and 'exherbo'. a software is not to be judged by its creators, but on what it does. as i've said paludis has some flaws (is written in c++, it takes ages to update, it doesn't behave very well with x86 abi on multilib profiles, lacks binpkg support) but also has some better issues (a big deal of hooks that improve it very much, it can handle very external overlays and update them without passing through another package and this is i think the best thing of paludis, is can handle per package or per overlay, keyword and unmask configs, it can use eix through the eix hook, it can show new packages in the tree after update and show a report of your system, is fast on first run world update - on 400+ package world the time of resolving deps and everything is less than 30 secs, while portage on first run goes for some minutes, it has reconcilio that is faster and cleaner than revedep-rebuild and it handles the new scm build system which is really nice. the problem with that build system is its test. portage won't adopt it for the moment because it still has to be tested but that a package can suggestother packages and the user would be able to accept suggestions or not is a big step towards usability. -- dott. ing. beso
