Yet another "mine's better than your's" war

[JSWolf]

Why is it that so many people use these broken suppositories (er repositories) when they serve up broken software?

[aborel]

Repositories normally provide well-tested packages, so they are the trusted source in general. As they should be: mixing packages from the official repository and non-managed software can make your system impossible to properly maintain if you don't know what you are doing.
I agree that this doesn't seem to be the case for calible, except perhaps for distributionts that act extra-super-carefully, to the point of providing only semi-obsolete versions of our favorite ebook management tool.
Ubuntu is definitely a member of that prudent family. Sometimes they make great decisions for the users, and sometimes they choose so poorly that they become the quasi-champions of broken-by-design software components **cough**systemd**cough**.

[Quoth]

If you are using Linux Mint and some other Distros then direct install of Calibre, Viber, Waterfox and maybe LibreOffice can be needed. Avoid Snap and Flatpack versions of programs in the Software Manager.

Last few times the Software Manager only installed 64 bit WINE, which is almost pointless. Virtually all non-game Windows legacy stuff that actually works on WINE and that you'd actually want, needs 32 bit WINE. Uninstall the 64 bit, add an environment variable or two and then use apt-get.

There about four ways to install from the distros/repositories. You can also add repositories and there are many ways to add non distro/repository applications. The least friendly I ever encountered was Joyce/PCW8512 emulator that required old tool chain parts and a build from source. Though it works. Even a 3" drive if you have a real 3.5" floppy controller (warning, +5V and +12V are reversed on 3" drives!)

It's no problem using unofficial sources if they include their own dependencies.

[JSWolf]

Windows does not have a repository and I've never seen the need for one. I can manage the software on my system no problem. Why is if that Linux needs a repository when it doesn't work all that well? Can't Linux users manage software themselves? Going to the official websites to download is the way to do it.

[pazos]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Windows does not have a repository and I've never seen the need for one. I can manage the software on my system no problem. Why is if that Linux needs a repository when it doesn't work all that well? Can't Linux users manage software themselves? Going to the official websites to download is the way to do it.

Do you ask because you want to know? If so:

Linux is a kernel, not an OS.
Windows and OSX are OSes.
Linux distros are OSes too.
Programs, like calibre, use libraries that are available for the 3 OSes

The only solution in both Windows and OSX is to package the libraries with the program. Unless you're using a very limited subset of libraries bundled with the OS, like WinApi or Cocoa.

In Linux distros you can a) package libraries with the program (like official calibre is doing) or b) package your program as part of a linux distro (like distro maintainers are doing).


a) has the benefit of non relying on distro libs (which can be incompatible, obsolete, whatever)
b) has the benefit of repurposing a single library for all packages/apps that can use it.

So, In windows, installing Sigil, Calibre and VLC will give you 3 different Qt libraries. In linux it really depends. You can pretty much do whatever you want.

In debian/arch/whatever (linux based OSes) you install Sigil, Calibre and VLC from distro's own repos and you'll get the three packages with a single Qt library.

Are the packages obsolete for you (which is probably the case in Debian/Ubuntu)?. No problem: use upstream packages, get an appImage, a snap, build from source, swith to a rolling release distro.

Regarding calibre. I'm very fan of how it is handled on Slackware. Calibre is not part of the OS, but a community contributed package. Users of slackware can choose between getting an old version that uses system wide libraries or using the last version (which does repackage upstream binaries to use the same package management as the rest of the OS). See it for yourself: https://slackbuilds.org/result/?search=calibre&sv=14.2

Of course, slackware users can also install upstream/Kovid binaries directly, or build from source if they're motivated enough, or run the program in a container or ...

The same applies to all linux based OSes, possibilities are endless. Choose your own adventure, including not playing the game.

But, I'm afraid you're not interested in answers and yet again you ask random questions about software you don't need, you don't understand, you don't need to understand and you'll never use. In that case, please stop.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Windows does not have a repository and I've never seen the need for one. I can manage the software on my system no problem. Why is if that Linux needs a repository when it doesn't work all that well? Can't Linux users manage software themselves? Going to the official websites to download is the way to do it.

It does, it's just not called a repository. Also it often forces updates, causes you to be unable to turn off quickly if doing a shutdown upgrade. Or can decide to delay your login till it does an update.
It also has the Windows Store.
It has now MS Store apps you can't disable or uninstall.
Then also you can find you need an official MS component. It might be a tickable option in Program Settings in one of three places. Then it downloads from the MS "repository". Or you discover you have to search MS now broken Tech Support that mainly offers adverts for Office 365 when you try and find official MS tools or components.
Also many MS official programs from their site need a specific .net version, that often can't be found or the link on the page is incorrect. Try the MS official Keyboard Creator on 64 bit Win10.