To package or not to package (Was: [tlug] Well now I'm hosed - Dapper/Edgy died)

[Sigurd Urdahl <sigurdur@example.com>]

Godwin Stewart wrote:
[..]
> Dave, I know this comment doesn't help you, but your current
> predicament with circular dependencies is the main reason I cannot
> abide package-based distros. You will run into the same problem with
> any one of the dozens there are available, regardless of the package
> management system they employ, be it apt, rpm, yum, whatever.
>
> One of these days I'm going to write a document advocating source-based
> distros. Would you allow me to use this posting of yours as an example
> of why package-based distros can be so frustrating?
>   

Godwin, could you elaborate a bit more on why you believe source-based 
distros are better than package based?

Personally I have very limited experience with source-based distros, but 
I have been using package based distros both privately and 
proffesionally for quite some time now (privately close to 10 years, 
professionally for 6).

I have seen circular dependencies create problems, but only been bitten 
by it a couple of times. And it's always been solvable, and I believe 
it's been at least partly as an effect of not running the distro 
cleanly, but adding extra packages from "external sources".

I find it very valuable to have well functioning package system in my 
distros. Under normal circumstances I don't have to think about 
dependencies, they're automagically solved. Upgrades are usually 
flawless and take little effort from me. In production environments I 
always run stable versions of distros, thus fixes are backported, and 
the interface between the program and it's environment (the users, the 
other packages, me - the sysadmin) stays unchanged. I can keep my 
systems up to date with little risk or work.

In major upgrades I seldomly see problems with any of the distro native 
packages (anything brought in from other sources have a risk of 
breaking). Usually I am conservative on major upgrades, I wait for other 
people to test it first, run the upgrade on a test system, read up on 
the doc, and usually start with base stuff (glibc, package system) 
before upgrading the general system.

Of course my private systems and workstations get a treatment that is 
rougher, a lot more aimed at fun, ease of use and an abundance of silly 
features, but then again they don't have heavy SLA's:-)

Should a transition to source based distros make my life easier as a 
sysadmin? Would I have more fun as a desktop user?


kind regards,
-sig