Package comparison of Antergos, Debian, OpenBSD
I recently looked at 38 pieces of software I use/would like to use and whether up-to-date versions are packaged in Arch Linux (in the form of Antergos), Debian, and OpenBSD. My findings surprised me a little.
First, the stats (as of May 08, 2016):
Antergos has 29 of 38 packages (76%). 24 of 29 (83%) are at the latest version or the latest version available in any of the OSes.
Antergos plus its unvetted user-contributed repository has 37 of 38 packages (97%). 33 of 37 (89%) are at the latest version or latest version available in any of the OSes.
Debian (Testing branch) has 37 of 38 packages (97%). 25 of 37 (67%) are at the latest version or latest version available in any of the OSes.
OpenBSD (current branch) has 27 of 38 packages (71%). 19 of 27 (70%) are at the latest version or latest version available in any of the OSes.
The stats for OpenBSD are a bit misleading. OpenBSD has almost all the necessities at the latest version, or a single point release behind. The packages OpenBSD lacks are chiefly heavy emulators (pcsx2, dolphin, higan) or games (endless-sky). Also, OpenBSD updates GNOME very quickly. The same is not true of Debian.
The take-away? Software selection is not a reason for me to switch from Debian (Testing) to Arch/Antergos. If OpenBSD supported recent video cards, I would switch and take the time to try and learn how to package the useful software it lacks (mp3diags, gimagereader, mat).
