Ubuntu going with SMART?
The Smart Package Manager project has the ambitious objective of creating smart and portable algorithms for solving adequately the problem of managing software upgrading and installation. This tool works in all major distributions, and will bring notable advantages over native tools currently in use (APT, APT-RPM, YUM, URPMI, etc).
During an interview with The Linux Link Tech Show recently, Mark Shuttleworth did drop a few hints that Ubuntu might be following the footsteps of the SUSE Lizard by adopting SMART as their package manager of choice. Personally I would love to see SMART being implemented in as many distros as possible, eliminating the need to learn each distro specific package management. Why not as well implement this package manager in Solaris and BSD!
So the SMART is becoming very smart indeed … good to see that.
Why not implementing Synaptic/aptitude in as many distros as possible?!
PCLinuxOS has it, not only Debian-derived ones.
If Ubuntu goes with Smart, I’ll NEVER try Ubunbtu again!
Could anybody explain to me HOW AND WHY IS SUPPOSED TO BE SMART… SMARTER?!?!?!?!!!
Comment by Béranger — June 15, 2006 @ 11:43 am
Well, one very smart feature of SMART is automatically adding the mirrors for servers. Suppose you are installing an app from kde-repo from opensuse.org server, if that server is unreachable or slow, it will download the same package from another server.
One more good thing about SMART is that Ipersonally have noticed that it is much better with dependencies, compared to Apt.
Next - it’s universal. It can handle Apt/Yum/Yast, etc repositories.
One ver big drawback compared to Synaptic, not Apt, is the GUI. Synaptic is much friendlier and easier to use.
Comment by E@zyVG — June 15, 2006 @ 12:41 pm
Well, I understand the “universality” of Smart.
But this just CAN’T happen to successfully solve dependencies across package types!
Different types of repositories — OK.
Different types of packages — not always OK.
That’s a nonsense to “fix all the needs” with a single tool! If this will fix World’s problems, then Fidel Castro should run for the U.S. Presidency!
As for the GUI, I’m finding it highly non-intuitive.
Why not building a “universal tool” on top of Synaptic?
If they started Smart just to show… they’re smarter, this is a bad move.
Comment by Béranger — June 15, 2006 @ 2:45 pm
Actually SMART engine + Synaptic GUI would be awesome.
Comment by E@zyVG — June 15, 2006 @ 3:20 pm
I’m content with apt+synaptic. I would rather, that perhaps smart be an option, but not default.
Apt and Gnome are the number one and two reasons, that I am currently using Ubuntu. This combination is what I like about it. I have used other distros, and they are not really that much different than Ubuntu, except for the combination that Apt+Gnome has in Ubuntu.
Realistically, any Linux distro can have apt and Gnome installed. Although, if you don’t quite know what you’re doing, it may be a bit of a challenge to configure your repositories to work with apt. For instance, if you use a .rpm based distro, you would have to configure apt for this.
Why I like Ubuntu is because of its packaging. They make things rather simple, (not that I’m a simpleton). I prefer to spend my precious time using my computer system, rather than configuring it. Granted most modern distros have their own perks, and packaging for user-friendliness.
I suppose it is a matter of preference. I have also heard talks of CNR for Ubuntu. This, I feel, would actually seem better to me than smart. By this I mean, for $20.00 USD per year, users can pay for a service which is actually even easier than using Synaptic. Some purists have angrily blasted the idea, claiming that people shouldn’t pay for free software. The fact is that the software is free. The service costs $20.00/year USD. The reason that I see a market for this, is that users such as my Father (who now is using Ubuntu, thanks to yours truly), wouldn’t have to figure out what a repository is, then have to call me for assistance. He instead, would merely click a program to install, and let the system do the rest of the work.
$20.00 seems like a very fair price for this type of piece of mind. CNR is actually easier than Windows to install programs, and all are from a trusted source.
That being said, I prefer Ubuntu to stay with apt. If third party package managers are available, I say, more power to ‘em.
(my $.02)
Comment by Brent — June 16, 2006 @ 2:38 am
According to a review I read on SuSE 10.1, smart is supposed to have better (yes, smarter) algorithms for resolving dependencies. And if you don’t specify a version of the package you want, will pick the most suitable version for your system. All I know is I’m using it and it works great. I also have apt (install-apt4suse) + synaptic installed in case I ever want a package and the servers down or whatever. I’ve also ran Ubuntu, Kbuntu, Xbuntu, Fedora, Mepis, Vector and others. I don’t think there’s a better package manager than smart. As far as I’m concerned, If *buntu decides to go with smart, it’s a plus.
Comment by Stu — December 10, 2006 @ 5:47 am