Pirut: Blessing or curse?
FedoraForum.org - Fedora Support Forums and Community
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 21
  1. #1
    JN4OldSchool is offline "Sean The Terrible" -- The forum(er) Vista® rep
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Pirut: Blessing or curse?

    Well, maybe the title of this thread is a little extreme, but is Pirut really worth the effort? I just finished my 6th install of FC5 on various computers and by now I have learned to just bypass Pirut altogether. MIT will be happy to hear this, I think Yum Extender blows Pirut away. It is a lot more flexible, easier to use, faster to load and just works better, not to mention Pirut lacks any kind of repo control whatsoever. I also have a quibble with the add/remove package setup in Anaconda when first installing. FC4 was much better. The packages were in your face, not hidden away behind a small “customize now” check box. You had the option to check one “install everything” box that put a nice full system on your drive without adding all the extraneous crap FC5 includes that should be in extras in the first place. I also miss the add/remove packages system in FC4 that would load packages off the install discs. Why was this not included in Pirut? Why should I have to download packages that are already on the install disc but that I didn't load during the install for one reason or another? How about those poor souls with dial up connections? This is a grave oversight that I have seen mentioned more than once in this forum. I love FC5, and I also love the choices Linux gives us. Everyone has their own ideas about what is useful and what isn't. While I appreciate the effort the developers put into creating all these packages, working for free, I must apologize for saying Pirut, and Pup along with it was a waste of time and resources. They should have just included Yum Extender as the package management system.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Age
    32
    Posts
    1,162
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Boy am I glad I wasn't the only one thinking this. Pirut takes on my system up to a good minute to load whereas Yumex takes maybe a few seconds. Pup I don't even bother with. As far as not getting packages installed from the CDs even with the DSL if the mirrors get hit hard it can take hours before you download a package. Pirut could be better but right now it's useless at times. I still use it to remove packages but as far as installing goes it's yum or yumex.
    Laptop: Lenovo ThinkPad T410, CPU: Intel Core i5 520M, Ram: 8GB DDR3, Hard Drive: 320GB, Graphics: Intel HD, OS: Windows 7 / Arch Linux x86_64
    Desktop: Motherboard: ASRock Fatal1ty AB350 Gaming K4, CPU: AMD Ryzen 3 1200, RAM: 8GB DDR4, Storage: Samsung 850 Pro 256GB, Graphics: Asus Radeon RX 550 4GB, OS: Arch Linux x86_64

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Athens-Greece
    Posts
    1,331
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    i am old fashioned,maybe because I am too old ,I prefer yum.
    Drink more beer but never drive !!!
    :) :p :eek:

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    yeah pirut is not only ugly to look at but really really slow and sometimes locks up on me

    for updates a simple yum update in a terminal is good

    for installing/removing stuff yumex rocks!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    CALIFORNIA, yeah
    Age
    94
    Posts
    1,657
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Looks and functionality aside, pup and pirut are probably OK for new installs and the uninitiated. As such, pup is clearly labeled "Software Updater" under system tools and pirut appears as "Add/Remove Software". On the other hand, why wasn't yumex used for that purpose? I think that MIT has done a great job, is on top of it in terms of maintaining the program. His pace of improving the code has been prompt, if not fast and furious. If yum is the primary means of maintaining the system, yumex makes sense. Other than that, I think there is just more code and replication of functionality.
    But then, who knows what is planned for the future and what the developers envision.
    Last edited by Zigzagcom; 19th April 2006 at 07:33 PM.
    Ziggy

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Tracy, CA USA
    Posts
    96
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You know, when I first installed FC5, the first thing I reached for was Yum. Even now, Yum is so nice and streamlined...

    I think I only used PUP once.
    Don't put it off for another second. Procrastinate today!
    Registered Linux User #414917

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    354
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Pirut loads much faster on my box. I can't stand that Yumex takes for ever to build the 'available packages' list. I also added a line in the fedora-core.repo file to be able to install stuff from the install DVD. I also disabled the internet source for core. My understanding is that this is a first crack at Pirut and the ability to install from disks without having to add a repo for the disk is coming. My guess is the repo control would be added as well. The functionality in the current version of Pirut is limited, I admit, but I feel it works well.

    Paul

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Pleasanton, CA, USA
    Age
    29
    Posts
    195
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Pirut freezes on my computer if I try and install 2 or more packages. I try not to use it most of the time.

    Thanks,
    Perry

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Wiltshire - UK
    Posts
    199
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just installed FC5 for the first time. Seamless install, PUP updated everything without problems, couldn't make any sense of PIRUT so loaded Yumex and got on with the job...

    Can anyone explain why Pirut is needed and what benefits it offers over Yumex?
    One man's geek is another man's guru...
    Registered Linux User #363869.
    i686 F8, Quad Core F10 64-bit, Core2Duo F16 64-bit.

  10. #10
    JN4OldSchool is offline "Sean The Terrible" -- The forum(er) Vista® rep
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Can anyone explain why Pirut is needed and what benefits it offers over Yumex?
    Darned if I know, hence the purpose of this thread...So far we have just one pro-Pirut poster. Like Flounder I sure am glad I am not the only one to think Pirut worthless. Just use Yum and Yumex, at least for now.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Person- Exist- Between- Chair-And-Keyboard
    Age
    49
    Posts
    344
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JN4OldSchool
    Well, maybe the title of this thread is a little extreme, but is Pirut really worth the effort? I just finished my 6th install of FC5 on various computers and by now I have learned to just bypass Pirut altogether. MIT will be happy to hear this, I think Yum Extender blows Pirut away. It is a lot more flexible, easier to use, faster to load and just works better, not to mention Pirut lacks any kind of repo control whatsoever. I also have a quibble with the add/remove package setup in Anaconda when first installing. FC4 was much better. The packages were in your face, not hidden away behind a small “customize now” check box. You had the option to check one “install everything” box that put a nice full system on your drive without adding all the extraneous crap FC5 includes that should be in extras in the first place. I also miss the add/remove packages system in FC4 that would load packages off the install discs. Why was this not included in Pirut? Why should I have to download packages that are already on the install disc but that I didn't load during the install for one reason or another? How about those poor souls with dial up connections? This is a grave oversight that I have seen mentioned more than once in this forum. I love FC5, and I also love the choices Linux gives us. Everyone has their own ideas about what is useful and what isn't. While I appreciate the effort the developers put into creating all these packages, working for free, I must apologize for saying Pirut, and Pup along with it was a waste of time and resources. They should have just included Yum Extender as the package management system.
    I couldn't agree with you more. If YUM is the default package manager (uh huh, which it is uh huh) then, (I'll ask a rhetorical question) why not allow to manage packages by default? You know default as in default desktop is Gnome...
    | Al3xanRO | Registered User #413462 |
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved. -Acts 2:21

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Posts
    2,653
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Current version Pirut is functionnal although incomplete. Major change will occur Fedora Core 6 with the ability to add repository and install package from different medias like CD/DVD. Pirut aims to be user friendly. Remember how some people complain about unstability of early version of yumex. I won't be surprised that some yumex features will be implemented on Pirut.
    Software updater will get an applet to check the update. Most important with the use of Pirut is to report bugs and enhancement to developers. Don't forget that yum has come a long way to be mature enough.
    Desktop CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 3600 - Memory: 32GB DDR4-RAM - GPU: Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 560 4GB OC Storage: Samsung 970 EVO Plus 500 GB NVMe and Seagate 7200 RPM 2TB - OS: Fedora Rawhide Design Suite x86-64 and Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
    Laptop HP ENVY x360 15- APU: AMD Ryzen 2500U - Memory: 16GB DDR4-RAM - Storage: Samsung 860 1TB SSD - OS: Fedora 33 Design Suite x86-64

  13. #13
    JN4OldSchool is offline "Sean The Terrible" -- The forum(er) Vista® rep
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    All great points. Initially, I just have to ask why? Why Pirut when we already have a fully functional package manager in Yumex. But then again, why KDE when we have Gnome? Why OO.o writer when we have Kwrite and Abiword? Why do we need 10+ music players in Linux that accomplish the same thing, with most being nearly identicle? I vehemently argued FOR such choices not long ago in another thread. Hey, if you think you can build a better mouse trap then why not? I wont change my tune at this juncture. We shall see what Pirut evolves into, but for now I will happily stick to Yumex.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    354
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think Pirut is meant to be simpler than Yumex. Perhaps, Yumex is meant more for power users?

    Paul

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    CALIFORNIA, yeah
    Age
    94
    Posts
    1,657
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I wanna be a power usah, LOL
    Ziggy

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Curse You Fedora 9...
    By plazman30 in forum Fedora Focus
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 4th September 2008, 06:45 PM
  2. YUM and PIRUT
    By greenberet in forum Using Fedora
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 4th January 2007, 06:53 AM
  3. pirut
    By ammad in forum Using Fedora
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 2nd December 2006, 06:45 PM
  4. Curse thee ATI Radeon 9700 (Or not?)
    By jedisecret in forum Hardware
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2nd February 2005, 10:29 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •