whats the best way to install app on a debian based system

[mrchow19910319]

like the title said, what is the best way to install an app on a debian system?

 

is it apt or app images or snap?? is there a way to avoid snap?

 

also why is apt package manager does not have the LATEST app? 

 

whats the best way to avoid dependencies conflict on Ubuntu/debian system?? 

[Lightwreather]

4 minutes ago, mrchow19910319 said:

is there a way to avoid snap?

So, snaps are thing by default only on Ubuntu and many of it's derivatives.

4 minutes ago, mrchow19910319 said:

is it apt or app images or snap??

Depends. Appimages are what I'd prefer (gets rid of a lot of dependcy nightmares)

 

5 minutes ago, mrchow19910319 said:

also why is apt package manager does not have the LATEST app? 

Stability?

There should be nightly versions. But typically for the latest updates, you'd need to refresh your repositories. And updates' age are generally handled by the distro.

[Sauron]

The native package manager (apt) should be preferred, if for some reason you need fixed dependencies or a more recent version you can try snap.

[10leej]

1 hour ago, mrchow19910319 said:

like the title said, what is the best way to install an app on a debian system?

 

is it apt or app images or snap?? is there a way to avoid snap?

 

also why is apt package manager does not have the LATEST app? 

 

whats the best way to avoid dependencies conflict on Ubuntu/debian system?? 

Apt is targeting stability the rest honestly don't matter in contrast of which to pick.

 

I myself use apt for system stuff, badically qnything thst does have a gui I use apt to manage, everything else is snqp, flatpak, appikage depending on how I cqn get the application.

[mrchow19910319]

4 hours ago, J-from-Nucleon said:

So, snaps are thing by default only on Ubuntu and many of it's derivatives.

Depends. Appimages are what I'd prefer (gets rid of a lot of dependcy nightmares)

 

Stability?

There should be nightly versions. But typically for the latest updates, you'd need to refresh your repositories. And updates' age are generally handled by the distro.

 

2 hours ago, Sauron said:

The native package manager (apt) should be preferred, if for some reason you need fixed dependencies or a more recent version you can try snap.

 

2 hours ago, 10leej said:

Apt is targeting stability the rest honestly don't matter in contrast of which to pick.

 

I myself use apt for system stuff, badically qnything thst does have a gui I use apt to manage, everything else is snqp, flatpak, appikage depending on how I cqn get the application.

I see. Thanks!

[maplepants]

19 hours ago, mrchow19910319 said:

also why is apt package manager does not have the LATEST app?

This is because of what Debian is for. Debian is meant for stability. You do not have the latest hardware or software in Debian, instead you have an an extremely long support cycle for the OS. This is actually what makes Debian so great for servers. You can set up a server, and basically just know that it'll work without much fussing for the entire OS support cycle. Same with containers. 

 

If you want the latest and greatest, you can run Debian Sid or something like Ubuntu.

[Master Disaster]

53 minutes ago, maplepants said:

If you want the latest and greatest, you can run Debian Sid or something like Ubuntu.

Nah, even Ubuntu is generally a month or so behind bleeding edge for everything except security updates. If you want bleeding edge then you need Arch, that said there's very few crossover situations where either Debian or Arch would make sense, if you want Debian then you don't want Arch (servers for example) and if you want bleeding edge then you shouldn't be running it on a server.

 

20 hours ago, mrchow19910319 said:

whats the best way to avoid dependencies conflict on Ubuntu/debian system?? 

I assume this is because of what happened to Linus? Yeah that was pretty bad but it was also a bug caused by S76, out of all the PMs I've used apt is by far the best at dependency resolution and on base Debian or Ubuntu its VERY VERY unlikely that what happened to Linus would make it into the Wild.

 

As a general rule, if you try to apt get something and it has dependencies then apt will deal with them seamlessly.

[Giganthrax]

Whenever possible, I download stuff from the software store (apt). Doesnt matter to me what it is as long as it works.

 

When stuff isnt available on the software store for my distro or it doesnt work properly, I download a .deb file directly from the manufacturer's website and those always work perfectly.

[Alexeygridnev1993]

"Bleeding edge" software also means "bleeding edge" bugs, no matter the OS. That's not necessarily what you're looking for.

 

Flatpak, Snap or AppImage solve the problem of "dependency hell" (which can occur if two pieces of software require two incompatible versions of the same package  for example) by bundling all the dependencies with the software. Unfortunately, it also increases the package sizes enormously; so, if you can install something from apt without problems, go for it instead.

 

 

[mrchow19910319]

1 hour ago, Master Disaster said:

I assume this is because of what happened to Linus? Yeah that was pretty bad but it was also a bug caused by S76, out of all the PMs I've used apt is by far the best at dependency resolution and on base Debian or Ubuntu its VERY VERY unlikely that what happened to Linus would make it into the Wild.

 

As a general rule, if you try to apt get something and it has dependencies then apt will deal with them seamlessly.

nah, I watched some reaction video on youtube also heard that system76 fixed their bug in POPos. I asked this because I need to use a vpn software https://github.com/Dr-Incognito/V2Ray-Desktop that uses VMESS/shadowsocks protocal. It requires me the change the HTTP socket as well as SOCKS5 socket. so for the desktop environment I have to use Gnome OR KDE, and I tried kubuntu on my desktop it was not stable enough for day to day usage. So I sticked with Ubuntu 20.04. But I was having issue with installing Brave Browser. After I changed my PORT settings, sometimes WGET does not work, sometimes CURL does not work. So when it comes to brave browser, I switched to snap, and it installed successfully. I still hope that I can install all of my packages using one source, hence the question. Are you familiar with port forwarding or settings your own ports to fit with the VPN settings? 

[mrchow19910319]

34 minutes ago, Giganthrax said:

Whenever possible, I download stuff from the software store (apt). Doesnt matter to me what it is as long as it works.

 

When stuff isnt available on the software store for my distro or it doesnt work properly, I download a .deb file directly from the manufacturer's website and those always work perfectly.

I think I saw ChrisTitusTech one time said in his video that the software store (the GUI one) was always clunky seemingly unresponsive.. unfortunately that was my experience with Ubuntu store. I had to use the command line every time just to install the dev file. Might be different for you... Or I just use the synaptic package manager. That works as well. 

[maplepants]

2 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

Nah, even Ubuntu is generally a month or so behind bleeding edge for everything except security updates. If you want bleeding edge then you need Arch, that said there's very few crossover situations where either Debian or Arch would make sense, if you want Debian then you don't want Arch (servers for example) and if you want bleeding edge then you shouldn't be running it on a server.

This is correct, the true bleeding edge is Arch. Ubuntu has good support for new hardware, but calling it's software bleeding edge was overselling it for sure.

 

I also want to echo that you probably shouldn't run Arch on any server where you care about up time. In many ways it's the opposite of Debian. You run Debian on systems you want to set up once and use for years, and you run Arch if you want to constantly tinker with the system and make changes to it.

[Nayr438]

4 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

if you want Debian then you don't want Arch (servers for example) and if you want bleeding edge then you shouldn't be running it on a server.

I disagree with this statement, we run Arch on Several Servers in a production environment.

 

On 11/24/2021 at 7:42 AM, mrchow19910319 said:

like the title said, what is the best way to install an app on a debian system?

whats the best way to avoid dependencies conflict on Ubuntu/debian system?? 

From your Distro's local Repository. Most dependency hell situations are caused by outside repositories. Debian including most distro's are pretty good at grabbing dependencies for the average user, so you could use whatever packager manager comes with your Desktop Environment, otherwise there is always apt, aptitude, and synaptic on Debian based Distro's.

 

1 hour ago, mrchow19910319 said:

I think I saw ChrisTitusTech one time said in his video that the software store (the GUI one) was always clunky seemingly unresponsive.. unfortunately that was my experience with Ubuntu store. I had to use the command line every time just to install the dev file. Might be different for you... Or I just use the synaptic package manager. That works as well. 

If I am not mistaking the Ubuntu Store is a snap package now. Snaps are known to be slower and more resource heavy than a Native Package. If this is something that bothers you, you should look for a Distro that doesn't prioritize containerized packages, such as Debian, Arch, OpenSuse, Manjaro.

[Giganthrax]

2 hours ago, mrchow19910319 said:

I think I saw ChrisTitusTech one time said in his video that the software store (the GUI one) was always clunky seemingly unresponsive.. unfortunately that was my experience with Ubuntu store. I had to use the command line every time just to install the dev file. Might be different for you... Or I just use the synaptic package manager. That works as well. 

It's clunky and slow, but it's usable. I used it on Linux Mint Mate, ZorinOS, and Lubuntu, and it was serviceable. Also, it's supposed to have the most stable app versions, so that's usually where I look first. Stability is an absolutely key consideration for me, since I use my Linux systems for work. 

 

3 hours ago, Alexeygridnev1993 said:

Flatpak, Snap or AppImage solve the problem of "dependency hell" (which can occur if two pieces of software require two incompatible versions of the same package  for example) by bundling all the dependencies with the software. Unfortunately, it also increases the package sizes enormously; so, if you can install something from apt without problems, go for it instead.

 

 

I never understood this problem. We're in year 2021. Even the cheapest SSD now has a capacity of 120gb. What programs are you installing if they take so much space that package size is a factor? Even if a program takes multiple gigabytes of space, that's barely a drop in the pond. 

[maplepants]

48 minutes ago, Nayr438 said:

I disagree with this statement, we run Arch on Several Servers in a production environment.

Wow, that's pretty rare. Can I ask why? Are you always upgrading to extremely new hardware or something?

[Master Disaster]

53 minutes ago, Nayr438 said:

I disagree with this statement, we run Arch on Several Servers in a production environment.

Yeah but you don't count, I mean you're like a linux magician. Can you honestly say you'd recommend others do the same?

 

4 minutes ago, maplepants said:

Wow, that's pretty rare. Can I ask why? Are you always upgrading to extremely new hardware or something?

Nayr is the most knowledgable linux user on these here forums that I have ever encountered, bar none. Dude knows everything (at least seemingly).

[linkboy]

I'm running Mint and I prefer to get apps in this order

• Mint Software Manager
• .deb
• Flatpak
• Snap! (It's disabled by default, but enabling it isn't hard).

I'm not a huge fan of Applimage, so I don't really use them.

[Nayr438]

2 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

Yeah but you don't count, I mean you're like a linux magician. Can you honestly say you'd recommend others do the same?

If someone really has to ask what Distro they should use to run a server, then no, I would probably Recommend Ubuntu for it's simplicity for the average user.

For anyone else who is familiar with a Linux Server Environment and is comfortable with configuring everything, rather than relying heavily on Distro defaults, Yes I would recommend it.

 

2 hours ago, maplepants said:

Wow, that's pretty rare. Can I ask why? Are you always upgrading to extremely new hardware or something?

Actually we run older Hardware. As for the reasoning.

• I develop against and utilize upstream software.
• I don't like a Distribution deciding what dependencies I should or shouldn't use.
• I don't like a Distribution deciding what default configuration should be in place.
• While Arch is the first to get new Vulnerabilities, it's also usually first to get patched.
  • It also means we are the first to get bug fixes and features.
• There is no potentially disastrous major Version Changes, we update alongside the core software.
  • We do however have timed updates, as in we only update once every 2 week unless a bug that affects us has been resolved or a Known Security Vulnerability has been patched. While 2 weeks might seem like a long time, compared to most distro's we are still updating more packages far more often.
• The Arch Wiki

Obviously everyone's use case is different, but for our needs Arch is the only one that fulfills ours.

 

The idea that Arch is unfit for Server and Workstation Use is largely blown out of proportion, according to some stats we maintain a 99.8% uptime on our servers.

[Alexeygridnev1993]

2 hours ago, Giganthrax said:

I never understood this problem. We're in year 2021. Even the cheapest SSD now has a capacity of 120gb. What programs are you installing if they take so much space that package size is a factor?

It's a plain waste of space. If you install everything as snap or flatpak, you can easily waste dozens of gigabytes - which can mean a couple of extra games or thousands of photos.

 

If we follow your logic, we might as well just run every program in a separate VM

[Giganthrax]

1 hour ago, Alexeygridnev1993 said:

It's a plain waste of space. If you install everything as snap or flatpak, you can easily waste dozens of gigabytes - which can mean a couple of extra games or thousands of photos.

 

If we follow your logic, we might as well just run every program in a separate VM

Eh, I think you're just being needlessly frugal. Even cheap laptops nowadays come with 250-500gb drives, and I'm pretty sure most desktop computers nowadays have at least a terabyte or space. Even if your flatpacks take up 20-30gbs of that space, that's barely noticeable. 

 

In any case, to each his own. We can agree to disagree. 

[Alexeygridnev1993]

18 minutes ago, Giganthrax said:

Eh, I think you're just being needlessly frugal. Even cheap laptops nowadays come with 250-500gb drives, and I'm pretty sure most desktop computers nowadays have at least a terabyte or space. Even if your flatpacks take up 20-30gbs of that space, that's barely noticeable. 

 

In any case, to each his own. We can agree to disagree. 

Storage is the first thing I save money on; I own a laptop with 128 GB and my desktop PC is 256 GB. Larger SSDs are expensive, and hard drives are slow and prone to failure.

[shadow_ray]

3 hours ago, Nayr438 said:

according to some stats we maintain a 99.8% uptime on our servers.

Is this for the whole system or for individual machines?

[Nayr438]

40 minutes ago, shadow_ray said:

Is this for the whole system or for individual machines?

it would be across all of our servers combined over a year. Our longest downtime due to software was to our main storage server where we Deploy OpenZFS, it was for about 2 hours back in August. The error however had nothing to do with Arch Itself but rather the OpenZFS DKMS module from a outside repo (archzfs) not building against a upstream kernel. We have since switched all the systems over to a LTS Kernel with the exception of our build server, we have a plan in place if this gets orphaned. The rest is maintenance and one of our machines went down for a hardware failure.

The only problematic instance we have really had outside of OpenZFS is Gitlab, which has since been resolved with automation hooks thanks to a Arch Wiki contributor.

 

Venturing outside of the Official Repository is where most people run into issues and where Arch mainly gets it's reputation for being unstable. Really though, that can be the case with any Distro.

[maplepants]

On 11/25/2021 at 5:27 PM, Nayr438 said:

Actually we run older Hardware. As for the reasoning.

That's pretty interesting. You're that the use cases determines the distro. If the dependencies are so critical for your work flow, I can see why Arch is such a good match.

 

Two week update schedule seems pretty sensible. I've worked with anything clients who have from 1 to 4 weeks (not counting security patches of course). 

 

The Arch wiki is pretty outstanding. That site, ubuntuusers.de, online man pages, and developer.apple.com are probably a signifcant percentage of my browser history.