Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX

Standards for packing programs in linux

(1/3) > >>

dmcfarland:
Ive noticed Linux programs come in many different flavors IE rpm's, source, binarys, dpkg, and others. Is the linux/Unix community ever going to come out wiht an easy to use package format that makes it simple for an user to install a program without worrying about installing a bunch of libraries first and getting failed dependancy messeges. Windows has the whole setup.exe command and a set of files that make it run. I hate windows, but I am curious to know if the Linux community can agree on one standard thats relatively easy to use and easier to manage than what is currently availible?

H_TeXMeX_H:
Well, I dunno too much about other package managers, but yum (the Fedora Core package manager ... rpm based) is capable of resolving dependencies as long as they are included in the repo. I'm pretty sure apt-get has something like this too, although I've never used it. I'd say that things should improve in the future as Linux evolves. I personally don't have a problem with the current methods of package distribution, they work 98 % of the time.

Refalm:
People should start to use apt-get more. It's the ultimate package system.

WMD:
The problem with the Windows "setup.exe" installs is that rather than track and resolve dependencies, it ignores them.  And I don't mean ignore in the Slackware sense that they are simply not included, I mean that everything is usually bundled with and the files (DLLs, mostly) get thrown around into system32 and such without version checking.  Ever hear of "DLL hell?"  Yeah.  It can kill you by simply installing a bunch of software in order from newest to oldest.  With XP, MS tried to put some of this in, but so far it only includes DLLs shipped with Windows.

The Linux package managers keep full track of installed libraries and the compatible versions.  They may be less straightforward, but they are a MUCH better installation method because they keep the system cleaner.  That is, assuming the distro team doesn't fuck it up *takes quick glance at Red Hat*.

dmcfarland:
Ive been in DLL hell and TSR hell as well. :thumbup: I feel that there can be a way a universal standard for linux thats not full of bugs but makes it easy for someone thats not a technical genius to install software without having to know about libaries and dependancies. I hate setup and I hate all the stupid autorun crappola.

I think that would help make linux a better alternative to Microsoft. Im not saying make it exactly like that but come up something where everyone is on the same page, and make it a bit more freindly to the average joe six pack computer user.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page