Talk:List of software package management systems

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
List	This article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of software package management systems article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

that direct seems advertisment

Seems to me this "DIRECT" package manager sitting on top of the unix list and of all the lists is more advertising than anything.

It is not an advertisement anymore than the other commercially available products on the list. The description even follows the same format as some of the others. It was at the top of the list, because at the time the lists were alphabetical. In order to make it appear less of "advertising", I have insert it at the bottom of the lists, since there appears to be no ordering any longer. - Sirwigwam (talk) 23:47, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ubuntu

Being ubuntu one of the most popular linux distributions, and because not many people know that it's based on Debian, I think it should be added that Ubuntu uses dpkg as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.230.143.237 (talk) 04:01, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Additional package managers

FreeBSD's "pkg_install" suite and OpenBSD's rewrite of it as "pkg_add" ought to be mentioned. Also, ActiveState's PPM might be noteworthy for the application-level section. 24.54.148.214 (talk) 01:27, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why Windows Installer

Is Windows Installer really a package manager? I'm pretty sure it just installs applications, not packages. One of many places I've seen it said that Windows simply does not have any standard package management system: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7784665/windows-package-manager-for-c-libraries — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.192.5.27 (talk) 22:51, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

python packaging mistakes

Including both easy_install and PyPI as package managers incorrectly explains the package management in python. PyPI is the package repository and the depreciated package manager is easy_install and the current package manager is pip Lucractius (talk) 05:41, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Go get

I think go get is not a package management. It can't handle dependency and it has no update function. -- OlafRadicke (talk) 07:08, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

cross ref

It would be more useful to have a cross reference of package names across package managers.

Then, for example, if someone sees an apt-get command and they have yum, they would come here and see the equivalent package, or the equivalent yum command. Or if they see yum and have Ubuntu, they could do the reverse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.160.49.90 (talk) 23:33, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is it better to have the article be wrong or for it to not have a "correct" citation?

My edit was reverted due to bad citation: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=List_of_software_package_management_systems&oldid=prev&diff=749663660

What's the right choice? Should I just edit it again and exclude the citation? I've barely touched Wikipedia in years so am no longer familiar with the right protocols/formats/etc. :-/ --Brendan Hide (talk) 21:50, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Conan.io Missing?

Is https://conan.io Conan.io missing here? It is a c++ package manager. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.235.158.173 (talk) 11:47, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Windows:NPackD

https://npackd.appspot.com/ as one of the first is missing. It's open source (GPLv3) and has most of the wellknown packages. == 91.141.1.33 (talk) 12:09, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Add hunter?

Hunter: CMake driven cross-platform package manager for C/C++. Linux, Windows, macOS, iOS, Android, Raspberry Pi, etc. https://github.com/ruslo/hunter — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2407:7000:9726:4037:C74:5EB1:F664:44A4 (talk) 21:45, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Mobile" section went off topic

This article deals with software package management systems, yet the Mobile section mostly deals with software REPOSITORIES, not PMS. For example, Android only uses one package format, APK which is installed by the same underlying package mechanism. For example, DEB and RPM packages can also be installed manually or any other way on the Linux distros that support them, without the need for network repositories, as can APKs, without apt, yum or Play Store, respectively.

I understand the lines are somewhat blurred here because most of those systems aren't so tightly integrated as are those on desktop Unix-likes. But at the very least, those systems should be grouped around the underlying package formats and their core installer engines. The same goes for the Windows section below. --Arny (talk) 12:49, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]