Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I'm amazed that Suse has $2.5B to buy themselves. It's a horrible OS to work with. Anything not based on Apt as a package manager is a nightmare. What does Suse bring to the table other than pain? It's not as easy as Ubuntu, and not as well-known or well-supported as RedHat (which is also a pain in the ass, but at least a well-known pain in the ass). Who even uses Suse?



Suse is rock solid and, for a time, was basically the Redhat of Europe.

I still find places in the UK that run it but it’s less common now than it used to be.

I completely disagree with your point that anything not based in apt is horrible to work with.


(disclaimer: SUSE employee and user)

I get the impression that people using Debian and their derivatives seem to live under a rock regarding other distributions.

I would trust zypper dup hundred times over apt-get dist-upgrade. This gets amplified by the fact that openSUSE Tumbleweed (rolling distro), is much better auto-tested before being published every week, than my experience with sid was (tested by their end-users).

Today's Redhat dnf package manager is based on SUSE's dependency solver (https://github.com/openSUSE/libsolv), and both package managers provide a very nice user experience.

People seem to be still confused about SUSE "using YaST". YaST is just a front-end powered by libzypp (https://github.com/openSUSE/libzypp), like zypper is.


You only think apt is good because you're used to it and probably haven't used it very extensively. Portage is clearly a better package manager, have you used that?


Apt was the first package manager for a widely-used distribution (Debian) that handled dependencies well. I'm certainly biased, and haven't used everything available, but I have to be realistic about Linux distros in a professional environment. Your options at work are RPM-based distros (RedHat, CentOS, SuSE) or Apt-based distros (Ubuntu, and to a lesser extent Debian).

I'd never heard of Portage. Google indicates that it's Gentoo's package manager. It may be fantastic, but Gentoo is a hobby OS. Companies aren't going to use Gentoo. I'm not going to use Gentoo, because any benefits it has are going to be minimal, and it's never going to help my career.

There's a vast array of software out there that might be great for specific purposes, but I'm not going to swim upstream. So, while Gentoo and Portage may be fantastic, they're simply not on my radar, and certainly not on the radar of anyone I may work for.

I'm not disagreeing with you; we're just talking about completely different worlds at this point.


>Google indicates that it's Gentoo's package manager. It may be fantastic, but Gentoo is a hobby OS. Companies aren't going to use Gentoo. I'm not going to use Gentoo, because any benefits it has are going to be minimal, and it's never going to help my career.

>So, while Gentoo and Portage may be fantastic, they're simply not on my radar, and certainly not on the radar of anyone I may work for.

Google's Chrome OS is a Gentoo fork.


>Anything not based on Apt as a package manager is a nightmare.

Portage is not nightmare. Can apt run multiple unrelated installs in parallel?


> Anything not based on Apt as a package manager is a nightmare.

In my experience pacman, APK, OpenBSD's ports and packages, and Slackware's pkgtools are all as good as or better than apt in various ways, with the caveat that Slackware doesn't do dependency resolution, which most Slackware users actually see as an advantage.

To put it another way, there is no perfect package manager, there is only the tool that works best for you. The above tools are what I feel to be the superior package management schemes in no particular order; apt has left me hanging way too many times to be comfortable with it on a production machine. For others (like you) the opposite may be true. Regardless, your statement only applies to you and shouldn't be presented as the gospel truth.


I personally haste to use apt and for me anything is unacceptable other than pacman based distributions.


What's wrong with non-apt?




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: