Debian PPAs (please no)

[shevegen]

Sarge-in charge introduced it into this thread, and I responded because I'm tired of the anti-systemd crowd always dropping in some negative comments about systemd, regardless what the topic is.

How would it not fit to PPAs?

It is a package just like many other packages, and as far as I am aware, there are PPA repositories so I am sure there are also ones with different systemd variants.

add-apt-repository ppa:some/ppa

if Systemd is a dealbreaker for anyone, then the obvious and logical solution is to move to something without Systemd. It's pure math. Because the battle is lost in Debian. So it's not that people can not disagree with me, but it serves no purpose to continue to fight a lost battle. At some time people need to accept that Systemd is the default in Debian, and make their choices based on that fact. The fight is over.

This is correct and something I also don't understand - if you don't want systemd then you can switch to other distributions.

There are still some variants without systemd.

There is however had one thing that the debian crowd should keep in mind - you don't offer an alternative to systemd. The alternatives I have seen are huge workarounds.

Linux is about choice. Debian is not. And this was different ~10 years ago - I learned the Linux way on a debian system without the xorg server.

I wouldn't want to have to learn the intricacies of an ever growing system of complexity.

[spacex]

@shevegen

I do agree with you that the Debian alternative to systemd is a workaround, and one that isn't going to be viable in the long run. Anyone that feels systemd as a dealbreaker should move elsewhere. I wasn't happy for systemd myself, but to me it wasn't a dealbreaker. I accepted it as something that was going to come, whether I liked it or not, and that I had two choices, adapt to systemd as soon as possible, or leave Debian. This time I chose to stay with Debian, because Systemd isn't a dealbreaker for me. At least not at this point. The worst case scenarios might still make me leave Debian, but I'm going to wait and see how it plays out and what new steps Debian will make in the next crossroads. If it moves further in a direction I don't like, then I'll leave.

But I'll worry about that if and when we get there, and I'm in no way going to complaint. Because my freedom isn't worth more than the devs freedom. They develop whatever they want to, and I use it if I like it. That's what real freedom is about. Forcing devs to provide us with options they are not interested in developing, isn't freedom. We as users have to understand that the devs has to be free too. They aren't hired, and we can't demand or expect anything from them.

So the freedom is really this, you are free to choose what to use, or what not to use, and you are free to make your own if you don't like anything you are being offered. That's it. Linux offers a variety of choices, but you can't expect any specific distro to supply all the options. The freedom lies in the fact that you can choose between different distros and flavours.

Nobody ever said that all possible options should be available in Debian. If that was the case, then we wouldn't need any other distros. Different distros, different options.

[fireExit]

add-apt-repository ppa:some/ppa

Debian's proposal [already linked in this topic] is not to use Launchpad PPA's and probably not even the name PPA

On 05/09/2013 02:38 PM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 08 May 2013, Holger Levsen wrote:
>> I actually really like this idea! (Though I suggest "Debian Personal
>> Archive".)
>>
>> It's really different from what people know as PPAs.
> To be fair, "Personal" is probably not relevant either. I expect many of
> those repositories to be maintained by teams.
>
> DSPA = Debian Special Purpose Archive
> DSPR = Debian Special Purpose Repository
> DASP = Debian Archive of Special Packages
> SPA = Special Package Archive
>
> bikeshed \o/
Seriously, any of the above would be better than PPA.
Naming it like for Ubuntu fools our users into believing
it is the same thing, when the plan is not like that.

I like the first name above.

Thomas

[Deshapria]

add-apt-repository ppa:some/ppa

Debian's proposal [already linked in this topic] is not to use Launchpad PPA's and probably not even the name PPA

That's not exactly Debian's proposal, but another user's proposal. This user is proposing that the Debian users should have a user created archive.

The problem is Ubuntu has such an archive, and the website that hosts the archive is owned by Cannonical, and that these files has .deb ending.

We are told, we shouldn't use them, but if we look inside the .deb package, we'd see what that package is depending on. If we can find the dependencies in Debain repos, why not use them?

When we add-apt-repository ppa:some/ppa, it directs to a Debian repo, the one we are using, and not to an Ubuntu repo, so it would either pull dependencies from the Debian repo(s), or say it cannot be installed, or say find some dependencies. Most of those dependencies can be found in https://packages.debian.org, so what the problem in installing and trying out that user created app, even though it was created with Ubuntu in mind?

[Randicus]

The problem is Ubuntu has such an archive, and the website that hosts the archive is owned by Cannonical, and that these files has .deb ending.

Canonical having a repository of packages for their system is not a problem. In fact, it should be expected.

We are told, we shouldn't use them, but if we look inside the .deb package, we'd see what that package is depending on. If we can find the dependencies in Debain repos, why not use them?

Almost everyone who wants to use Ubuntu PPAs on a Debian system does not have even a basic level of knowledge about Debian or Ubuntu. They believe since Ubuntu is based on Debian and both use .deb packages, packages are interchangeable between the two systems. Your example assumes a higher level of knowledge and common sense than what many new users have. A repository like the one fireExit refers to is a much better idea.

[fireExit]

That's not exactly Debian's proposal, but another user's proposal. This user is proposing that the Debian users should have a user created archive.

but that is Debian: an association of users.

When we add-apt-repository ppa:some/ppa, it directs to a Debian repo, the one we are using

if i understand correctly what you are saying here, no.
when you use add-apt you are adding an Ubuntu external repo and pulling packages from there [alongside with dependencies that might come from the debian archive]

and then this: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs

Please do not report bugs about software in PPAs.
This is because software in PPAs are not provided by the official Ubuntu repositories, and in turn not supported. Instead, the PPA homepage would have a contact point and preference of the PPA provider. The exception is LibreOffice as per this mail, as LibreOffice is too big to be tracked via email: as described in the mail, file a bug on Launchpad with tag ppa.

[Deshapria]

That's not exactly Debian's proposal, but another user's proposal. This user is proposing that the Debian users should have a user created archive.

but that is Debian: an association of users.

Good. And, what is a PPA and the guys, who create them? Some sort of an association of Ubuntu users?

and then this: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs
Please do not report bugs about software in PPAs. ...

That's not a Debian or Debian users' problem.

By the way, the OP says "Debian PPAs, (please no)" NOT Ubuntu PPAs (please no).
I am for Debian PPAs, or whatever the name would be, and I agree with that Debian user's proposal (your link.) We should have that kind of Debian user's association. Or we are too old fashioned?

[fireExit]

what is a PPA and the guys, who create them? Some sort of an association of Ubuntu users?

you should look the official documentation or some semi-official documentation [there's more, a lot more]
The point that i'm trying to make is two-fold:
1. anyone (and i mean anyone) can create and publish a PPA; [and this is one of the main differences with the system Debian is discussing]
2. you should research more.

and then this: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs
Please do not report bugs about software in PPAs. ...

That's not a Debian or Debian users' problem.

you mis-understood; if not even Ubuntu supports PPA's! [because let's be clear, that's exactly what that means: it's there for you to use but don't come knock at our door if something wrong happens]

[Deshapria]

what is a PPA and the guys, who create them? Some sort of an association of Ubuntu users?

you should look the official documentation or some semi-official documentation [there's more, a lot more]
The point that i'm trying to make is two-fold:
1. anyone (and i mean anyone) can create and publish a PPA; [and this is one of the main differences with the system Debian is discussing]
2. you should research more.

and then this: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs
Please do not report bugs about software in PPAs. ...

That's not a Debian or Debian users' problem.

you mis-understood; if not even Ubuntu supports PPA's! [because let's be clear, that's exactly what that means: it's there for you to use but don't come knock at our door if something wrong happens]

No, I haven't!
All those links are for Ubuntu users, not for Debian.
The OP is about Debian PPAs, not Ubuntu PPas, at least the subject line says so.
If anyone wants to install Ubuntu apps, PPAs or whatever, they do it at their own risk--using any Linux OS is at our own risk.
The question is do we agree to have Debian PPAs (or whatever the name). I do. And, in the future I'd look into MX repos for ready made apps. Do you agree?

[fireExit]

Personally;
I like PPAs, I use PPAs in Debian and I like these "wannabe" developers. Without these wannabe developers, there won't be development. I would like to see a Debian Personal Package Archive, so I don't have to dig in to Ubuntu PPAs, so I could just add-apt-repository and apt-get them.

The question is whether PPAs are OK for Debian. The OP says "please no." I find PPAs quite useful.

[Deshapria]

Personally;
I like PPAs, I use PPAs in Debian and I like these "wannabe" developers. Without these wannabe developers, there won't be development. I would like to see a Debian Personal Package Archive, so I don't have to dig in to Ubuntu PPAs, so I could just add-apt-repository and apt-get them.

The question is whether PPAs are OK for Debian. The OP says "please no." I find PPAs quite useful.

Exactly.

[exploder]

I think ppas are necessary for some use cases. LibreOffice comes to mind because new versions offer better compatibility and often lots of bug fixes. I would just like to see ppa repos for extremely common base packages like this. Things like your browser and e-mail client are updated so why not update the most common things that people use everyday? I am not saying these packages should be rushed to be updated, they should be tested of course.

As it is right now updating LibreOffice in Debian can be challenging to say the least. If there were a ppa for LibreOffice it would make things much easier and it would be an option that is not forced on anyone that wants to stay with a more heavily tested default set of packages. Maybe including ppa repos would encourage more people to package for Debian? Certainly guidelines would be put in place to assure a certain level of quality is maintained.

This is all nothing more than opinion on my part, I have no influence what so ever on the powers to be. I do think ppa repos could benefit both Debian and the community in the long run though.

[geoaraujo]

As it is right now updating LibreOffice in Debian can be challenging to say the least.

It's not that hard at all:

Code: Select all

apt-get -t jessie-backports install libreoffice

[millpond]

add-apt-repository ppa:some/ppa

Debian's proposal [already linked in this topic] is not to use Launchpad PPA's and probably not even the name PPA

That's not exactly Debian's proposal, but another user's proposal. This user is proposing that the Debian users should have a user created archive.

The problem is Ubuntu has such an archive, and the website that hosts the archive is owned by Cannonical, and that these files has .deb ending.

We are told, we shouldn't use them, but if we look inside the .deb package, we'd see what that package is depending on. If we can find the dependencies in Debain repos, why not use them?

When we add-apt-repository ppa:some/ppa, it directs to a Debian repo, the one we are using, and not to an Ubuntu repo, so it would either pull dependencies from the Debian repo(s), or say it cannot be installed, or say find some dependencies. Most of those dependencies can be found in https://packages.debian.org, so what the problem in installing and trying out that user created app, even though it was created with Ubuntu in mind?

There is no central PPA repository any more. All PPA 'repos's are now directed to the sites of the individual developers, mostly apparently at Canonical's git-like Bazaar site.
Its possible that a few Debian packages not included in Ubuntu may be sourced from Debian, but it is unlikely to be too common.

Probably the best way to use a PPA is to compile the source from bazaar (joining is free): If it works, fine - if not - it might be best to pass on it, or find out if the required libraries are likely to cause any compatibility problems.

I believe that under no conditions should any of these packages from Ubuntu, bazaar, or anywhere elese be labelled .deb as this gives the false impression that they are compatible with Debian - which many are not. Hells bells even many of the install scripts and the Bash variant seem *different* and incompatible. RPMs are probably more compatible, and at least they have Alien.

[@zephyr]

I would have to vote "NO" on the PPAs, regardless the label that maybe used. But, there are plenty of apps in the Debian repository that is developed and maintained by individuals. These apps are tested before entering the repository. A PPA on the other hand does not, and may conflict with other software, unmet dependencies, and could cause complete havoc on a system. The ubuntu websites concerning PPAs issue warnings about the PPA practice and suggest using the Download Center. PPA allows you to add an untested source for software to your source list, this to me is insane practice if you care about your install. This is unless you have plenty of time and enjoy formatting and have nothing worthwhile on your system.

I do not particularly like systemd, but Debian needs not to put more misery on the table for it's users with this nonsense of PPAs. We have sid, and stretch, which offer the cutting bleeding edge of dependable software, not always perfect, but prefer running sid. It always works itself out and an awesome install it is to have.

I can only suggest to anyone, don't put anything from another source on your PC that you don't know anything about, or need to have it. I never add from outside sources, this is trouble and cannot guarantee just what you install. It's all about unmet dependencies and may not effect anything at the present, but could interfere with later updates-upgrades of your current Debian apps and base installation. Don't shoot yourself in the foot. Hurts like hell and makes getting around difficult.