Why you shouldn't use Automatix.

[DeathKitten]

I honestly can say I'm not familiar with everything talked about in this article, but from what I could understand/what I read before my eyes glazed over, it seems like there are lots of reasons why Automatix is the devil and should not be used.

http://mjg59.livejournal.com/77440.html

Anyone more knowledgeable want to jump in and either break this down for the newbies, or offer their opinion on how valid the observations are?

[Snowhog]

Re: Why you shouldn't use Automatix.

Yep. I'll stick with Adept thank you very much.

And as others have pointed out, automatix can/does mess up your sources.list, making Adept unusable (until the sources.list file is fixed by the user).

[a_hippie]

Re: Why you shouldn't use Automatix.

I read this story too, it was on lwn.net. . . I don't want to knock the guys over at automatix, since I think they are trying to do a really nice thing, BUT, will, I don't want to use the code from this point on. . .

Does anyone have a good opinion of easyubuntu? I've used it before and it seemed to work a lot faster than automatix, but I wonder if it might suffer the same problems?

Thanks!

[Snowhog]

Re: Why you shouldn't use Automatix.

Well, in MHO, if you are using *ubuntu, then use Adept. It is a good tool. Others have also said, that other than/in addition to Adept, download and install Synaptic, which you can do through Adept.

[DeathKitten]

Re: Why you shouldn't use Automatix.

I'm really not sure why people need these "automated" tools, the community needs to be teaching people how to use the medibuntu repositories. Once you add them to your source lists, you should be able to get everything you need installed through Adept or Synaptic.

Can we get the community to better inform the newbies that the best solution is medibuntu, and not these "one size fits all" automated installer games?

[raijinsetsu]

Re: Why you shouldn't use Automatix.

How about a better way of handling sources??

Maybe a sources.d directory. Then it would be easy to install new sources through adept/aptitude... You could do things like "apt-get install sources-universe"... Instead of relying on forum posts on how to edit your sources.lst(everyone seems to have a different method). apt-get could also give a warning about the sources your adding, like saying "sources-universe will allow untested packages to be installed. Are you sure you want to continue?"

Personally, I hate the sources.lst file... It's so... messy. If I never had to hand edit it again, it'd be too soon.

[a_hippie]

Re: Why you shouldn't use Automatix.


That is a really good idea. If someone could post (on a site safe from USA) the repositories and the stuff needed for most playback, that would be fine with me. I actually like both the new and old adept manager, so it would be fine.

I just want to watch my DVD's, play other folks MP3's, and still be able to surf media clips (wmv, RA, RAM, mpg(s), as well as the dredded flash.

Further, I still like firefox and it's new version swiftfox, and it would be REALLY nice to have the pluggin's just work.

Yes, easyubuntu makes this just happen (as well as automatix) it just makes it happen way more faster than adept/website etc. . .

Still, would like to get opinions on easyubuntu--is it stuffed with problems too?

Thanks everyone. I really value everyones advice/experience/opinions.

[DeathKitten]

Re: Why you shouldn't use Automatix.

The Medibuntu team gives a very clear and easy tutorial on their website on how to add their sources where you can just copy and paste into the command line. (See? http://www.medibuntu.org/repository.php) How is copy and pasting two lines into the konsole window not simple? Just need to get the newbies pointed to the Medibuntu site, and everything else should be just as easy as the automated packages, except you don't have to beg the forums for help fixing what the automatix broke.

[javierrivera]

Re: Why you shouldn't use Automatix.

Can we get the community to better inform the newbies that the best solution is medibuntu, and not these "one size fits all" automated installer games?

There is not such a thing like a "best solution". There are lots of "best solution for me".

While I agree that mediabuntu is the a good solution for people interested in keeping their system working, other people can happily prefer a system less stable but with an easier 'click'here'and'don't'understand'what'i'am'doing' install.

So, we as a community should inform them of all the possibilities, even advice them, but let them choose. If they don't learn to make elections, they are not going to be ever comfortable in linux-land.

BTW, I usually download debs for medibuntu, I don't add the full repository, as I don't want to install some of the other packages there (specially mplayer "upgrades").

How about a better way of handling sources??

Easier than the adept (or synaptic) way?.
Just check everything is quite a simple solution for people who prefer to click things to edit text files.

Javier.

[DeathKitten]

Re: Why you shouldn't use Automatix.

BTW, I usually download debs for medibuntu, I don't add the full repository, as I don't want to install some of the other packages there (specially mplayer "upgrades").

They stopped offering mplayer on medibuntu recently, apparently they felt that the standard version in the *buntu repositories did everything important that they were trying to add. It didn't work right for me once they did that, but I've since switched to using VLC, so I'm happy anyways. *shrugs*

As for letting people have a choice what to do, let them find the *click here to install and break your system* stuff on their own, even inform them of the risks when they ask about it, and encourage them to go the medibuntu way. Once they copy and paste, they can point and click in adept and synaptic. However, it's not like we're holding a gun to their head and saying they can't use the other systems, we're just encouraging them to use a system that's a lot less likely to break their system.

[RealG187]

Re: Why you shouldn't use Automatix.

I dont get it, why is it so bad?

[Snowhog]

Re: Why you shouldn't use Automatix.

Because Automatix will corrupt your /etc/apt/sources.list rendering Adept Manager unable to open. The only fix then, is to edit or replace the /etc/apt/sources.list file with one that is uncorrupted.

[RealG187]

Re: Why you shouldn't use Automatix.

Because Automatix will corrupt your /etc/apt/sources.list rendering Adept Manager unable to open. The only fix then, is to edit or replace the /etc/apt/sources.list file with one that is uncorrupted.

Is it monopolizing like Micro$oft, so it tries to kill other managers?

[Snowhog]

Re: Why you shouldn't use Automatix.

[quote=RealG187 ]

Is it monopolizing like Micro$oft, so it tries to kill other managers?

No. Just not very well written code. Remember, all the software being written for Linux under the GPL, is being done so by volunteers. Some are better at it than others. If all one was using was Automatix, and did not use Adept, then one wouldn't have an issue. It's those that do use Adept and who then install and start using Automatix that are going to run into problems.

[RealG187]

Re: Why you shouldn't use Automatix.

Well coudlnt they just fix it?

I hardly use Adept, I usually use the Gnome one.

I had issues after installing VM Ware, it wouldnt work and everytime I ran apt-get it would try to creat a host-only network...