Jump to content

Talk:Package management system

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Autodmc (talk | contribs) at 16:42, 25 May 2006 (Installer != Package Management System). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

i'm a newbie try to installing umbrello. i've been download the package but i dunno how to install it. please help me. thanks before :>) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.153.240.200 (talkcontribs) 16:19, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mac OS X installer needs mentioning!

Mac OS X does have some package management functionality (an installer and a software update utility), which should be included here. - Samsara (talkcontribs) 13:04, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RPM is often used by another tool for handling dependencies, such as the Yellow Dog Updater Modified (yum) or the RPM-based version of the Advanced Packaging Tool (apt).

Some other package managers are

The following tools are simply front ends to RPM-based systems:

  • YaST used in SuSE
  • urpmi used in Mandriva Linux
  • yum used in Yellow Dog Linux and Fedora Core.

In addition, the advanced dependency-management system in APT has been ported to work on RPM databases as apt4rpm.

See also: Archive formats

- Samsara (talkcontribs) 18:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested merge of Package management system and Installer

Mostly I am suggesting the merge to force a clarification of what each article is about. Some of the material in Installer belongs in this article, and some material that clearly belongs in Installer is simply absent. klik would be an example of an installer mentioned in the PMS article. - Samsara (talkcontribs) 20:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Installer != Package Management System

These two pages should not be merged. A package management system does install programs, but it also checks dependencies and installs those which are required by the program being installed, according to the preferences and command line choices made by the installing user. Most installers, on the other hand, assume that the user's system already has the required libraries or programs the program being installed requires. This is especially true in the case of Windows installers. Some well-written installers do check, usually exiting if the libraries are not found, but most will only mention what is needed. But the inclusion of the functions of checking dependencies and downloading required libraries would, in my opinion, make an installer into a package management system. It might be argued that this makes a package management system a subset of installers, but I think they should still have separate entries to avoid confusion.

If you'd written that as a clarification on a merged page, it would be more useful. Not that it was news to me... And, following your proposed definition, it would seem that several examples are currently misclassified. - Samsara (talkcontribs) 20:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'd have to agree with the Installer != PMS. Here is my reasoning, let's see if it's bad. When I think installer, I think of a self contained EXE file that I can download and double-click, which will run it's included executable to move files from the executable into the directories where they need to be. An installer contains not only the program, but all support libraries as well. The installer checks to see if you have the support libraries installed, if not, it installs those libraries. A Package Management System, however, is separate from the actual program being installed. (My experience is with emerge from Gentoo and apt-get from Debian) You use the PMS system's program to download a separate package, then follow the instructions in that separate package to install that package. Should that package need support libraries, the PMS can download those as well; however, the program being installed DOES NOT contain it's own copies of the libraries like a Win installer. It depends on the PMS to get those for it.
So, in summary, to ME, a Installer is a program that contains within itself the program to be installed and it's support libraries. In contrast, a PMS is a Utility that gets the program to be installed as a completely separate file, and can retrieve any libraries the program to be installed needs as completely separate files. The difference is between WinampInstall.exe and apt-get(+x) + XMMS.deb + Mp3.deb + ... Autodmc 16:42, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]