Software distribution
Windows: Hey, here's your binary package (setup.exe)! Have fun!
MacOS: Hey, here's your binary package (setup.dmg)! Have fun!
Linux: Hey, if you are using Debiaçokasjiednfpoiswenpfoijhwepqoifjwepqoijfasdçljkfnpweoujiqhfpúiqweohfpsdjlkohfçalksdjfpqweoijfp´woqe
Other urls found in this thread:
>ç
>Needing to find a website just to install a program
Linux: apt install firefox
it's almost like there's a different way to install programs on different operating systems
Linus Torvalds extensively ranted about this years ago. Watch from the timestamp to his answer to this guy's question: youtu.be
>a thread where i roleplay as Satania died for this
Then it was clearly a shit thread on the verge of dying anyway.
but chocolatey
macOS's way of installing packages is even more retarded
.dmg isn't an executable, it's the Mac equivalent of a fUCKING ISO and then to install it you drag some folders. It's just ??????
malware infested
Linux package installation:
1) sudo apt install
2) that's it my guy
Gatekeeping.
As long as it keeps mouthbreathers like you out of the ecosystem, it's all fine.
>Dependency not met, stupid-library-0.3.5_what-3 is not available
>you drag some folders. It's just ??????
It is pretty simple. One of the nice things about OS X, but it all falls apart when software wants to drop files in /Library or ships as a pkg. Those can be a pain to remove.
update ur system regularly
cringe @ all the people defending package managers when that's not even the point. portable applications aren't available on linux yet, hopefully they will be soon
Linux: Hey, here's your binary package (setup.tar.xz)! Have fun!
Usually that message appears if the library is not available on any of the repositories configured. Updated or not.
Try installing Opera 12.x on a modern Linux
>it fails, it's missing a library that has been purged from all repositories
Meanwhile, it still installs and works in Windows.
.appimages are exactly the same thing and they are loved!
Just go the software repository and install it from there.
what timestamp?
>Try installing Opera 12.x on a modern Linux
who the fuck uses opera?
Nothing is stopping you from doing that on Linux, the package manager is just more convenient.
Does that matter? The principle stands. "Installers" for Linux are too brittle.
And the answer is
>Presto will never die
Linux cucks BTFO!
Software distribution
Windows: Hey, here's your binary package (setup.exe)! Have fun! It will ask you to install two different types of adware pwease say yes (we gotta eat!)
MacOS: Hey, here's your binary package (setup.dmg)! Have fun!
Linux: sudo apt install program
You can always just download a tarball and literally just extract it and run it. You just have more options in Linux.
by the same soys who got the idea from macOS, I hate them
F L A T P A K
>Linux: Hey, if you are using >Debiaçokasjiednfpoiswenpfoijhwepqoifjwepqoijfasdçljkfnpweoujiqhfpúiqweohfpsdjlkohfçalksdjfpqweoijfp´woqe
Every distribution is an unique OS, you can't treat the entire GNU/Linux ecosystem as one OS. There's no authority on free operating systems, so you can't have unified solution - the only way to unify something is to make a thing so good, everyone wants to use it, or to make systemd and merge useful projects into it, maybe one day it'll have its package manager inside.
Also I just run "guix install something" it is much more convenient than shitty installers on Windows. The only people complaining are probably those who want to sell their proprietary spyware, because if a free software package is useful, it probably is already in the repository.
>Linus Torvalds extensively ranted about this years ago.
Lol if he really was a developer of an OS instead of just a kernel, he would have done his own, great package manager and he wouldn't have to complain.