Jump to content

Talk:Package manager: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Cewbot (talk | contribs)
m Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 1 WikiProject template. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "C" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 1 same rating as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Computing}}.
 
(4 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{Talk header}}
{{WikiProject Computing |class=C|importance=Low |software=yes |software-importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|
{{WikiProject Computing |importance=Low |software=yes |software-importance=Low}}
}}

== Outdated info on number of packages available ==
== Outdated info on number of packages available ==


Line 27: Line 28:


--[[User:Arny|Arny]] ([[User talk:Arny|talk]]) 13:06, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
--[[User:Arny|Arny]] ([[User talk:Arny|talk]]) 13:06, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

:Completely agree. I personally thought that it doesn't talk much about macOS package managers such as Homebrew/MacPorts or Windows ones like Chocolatey/Scoop. It's something I'd like to improve on at some point. [[User:PonyDuck21|PonyDuck21]] ([[User talk:PonyDuck21|talk]]) 15:28, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

=== Alpine among Linux ones ===
Completely agree that Linux should not be considered the only system. Probably a dedicated page titled "Package Managers for Linux Distributibutions" would be more appropriate.
Anyway Alpine Linux [[https://wiki.alpinelinux.org/wiki/Alpine_Linux_package_management | "apk"]] is currently missing among them, and is a very nice one!

Latest revision as of 06:43, 7 February 2024

Outdated info on number of packages available

[edit]

I don't know about other editors here, but it's been a long time since I've seen a Debian-based system with 'only' hundreds of packages available (or even installed simultaneously!). Shouldn't we at least mention that many modern systems have tens of thousands of packages? Right now the lead says, "... based on Linux and other Unix-like systems, typically consisting of hundreds or even thousands of distinct software packages; ..." At the moment, my system has 2043 packages installed and 69148 other packages not installed. And I use a FSF-sponsored distro which only includes free software packages! BlueGuy213 (talk) 21:47, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Well, it all depends on what's looked at; for example, a typical OpenWrt installation doesn't use too many packages. It isn't only about full-fledged general-purpose Linux distributions; however, this edit should help in making it more gerenally applicable. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 00:23, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FPM

[edit]

Needs updating as fails to mention FPM, i.e. yet another effing package manager next generation ;-) 167.98.51.116 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:33, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Generation

[edit]

There should be some mention/explanation of the packager or package generator in this article. Can anyone knowledgeable contribute something in that direction? --Trickstar (talk) 15:28, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Other Unix-likes? Modern universal Linux package managers?

[edit]

This article is heavily biased towards Linux. It completely fails to mention other Unix-like OS package managers like [[|Image Packaging System|IPS]] (Solaris), PBI (TrueOS/PC-BSD derivatives), FreeBSD ports/pkgng (FreeBSD), pkgsrc (OpenBSD and more).

Besides that, the article is also obsolete in failing to mention the new universal Linux package managers like Snap, AppImage, Flatpak (the only one that is at least linked from the article) and others.

I'll try to change the article to at least mention the above mentioned, but I guess I'll more or less just tag it appropriately. Any thoughts?

--Arny (talk) 13:06, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Completely agree. I personally thought that it doesn't talk much about macOS package managers such as Homebrew/MacPorts or Windows ones like Chocolatey/Scoop. It's something I'd like to improve on at some point. PonyDuck21 (talk) 15:28, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alpine among Linux ones

[edit]

Completely agree that Linux should not be considered the only system. Probably a dedicated page titled "Package Managers for Linux Distributibutions" would be more appropriate. Anyway Alpine Linux [| "apk"] is currently missing among them, and is a very nice one!