There is an abysmal ammount of out of date packages in the repos a few being flagged about a year ago

proof?

The nature of the GPL kind of encourages these kinds of practices

no????????

That'd be great, I hope someone, especially Redhat, actually writes a package manager that enforces that on all distros, so they can look even more alike and we have no way out of it.

It's called flatpak

Then go back to your Play Store™, you won't be missed.

Whenever the supremacy of their system is challenged, GNU/Cucks eschew technical debate opting for legal arguments instead. Strange.

How about some proofs.

The different package managers and package formats are not really the problem.

Different distributions have different update model. You have primarily two major: stable vs rolling.

Then you have extra rollback functionality like Nix.

The vast majority of problems come from developers being retards and breaking their software. Some packages are extremely easy to package some are nightmare. And I 100% prefer for some dedicated maintainer to package the software instead of developers.

In the last 5 years rolling releases have been proven to work well enough. My guess would be that would be the preferred way of updating in the future for most distributions.

So distro maintainers package the software in the repository (just like now), you update and have always the latest version. The software developers release snap/flatpak and you install it if it is not in the repository or if you need specific version.

Packaging is not that hard. Look at Solus Project, group of like 5 people package large amount of packages and keep it fairly up to date. And they are not even finished finalizing their infrastructure.

Gno.

If everybody compiled their own software then developers would stop using unnecessary libraries, and so simpler Linux software would become more popular.

Arch went to shit ever since they picked up systemDick. Install Void.

No, it fucking hasn't.
Rolling release makes no sense for regular users (unless we're talking about specific packages such as a web browser or an office suite) and doesn't make sense for enterprise at all.
There's a reason why every server/enterprise operating system has a fixed released similar to Debian's and not Arch's: because they need machines to work and be stable. Introducing new, untested features or removing old ones is a fucking pain in the ass and rolling back updates can break even more stuff.
That's why nobody but basement dwellers use Arch on servers.
As it is, the best solution would be an LTS, tested base such as Debian with Snap packages on top for the end user.

I disagree. Arch is far from perfect because of their vanilla package policy. If you look at something like Solus, you can have cake and eat it too. Rolling release with often most newest packages and it never breaks, because it is heavily curated.

For enterprise I would assume the business has a system administrator or at least a contractor that maintains their system. You can easily have rolling release of base system and the applications that are critical are basically snaps/flatpak. But that's just my basic idea, not sure how would that work in practice.

We tried that in the 90s. It was called the Linux Standard Base, and since it basically boiled down to "be Red Hat and use RPM" they looked like enormous jackasses when .deb based Ubuntu took over. LSB died a quiet death and has been removed from most distributions since then.

Each distro is built with different configuration setup. Some with rolling release some are not. Some with additional features in compile time. Some with different compiler all together. There's no way you could maintain it as in universal package manager enviroment. Btw, wasn't appimage designed to be just like you wanted, not that I'm favor with installing a software without superuser permissions. I think it's kind of shitty way to install a program.

This, there's nothing wrong with using the AUR tbh fam.

install gentoo

Appimage is basically the Windows way of doing stuff, yeah. Flatpak and Snap are closer to Android with repositories, DBus-based communication with the rest of $HOME, sandboxing, OSTree based dedupe, etc.

t. licensecuck

Not op but I never use AUR because I don't like the sound of my fan which only starts when I compile stuff.

this is called compiling the shit yourself.

It's called electron

Unless you're considering static libraries, that's not going to resolve the problems of dependency hell for you.

stop being a pussy.

Not to say Wangblows is better, but it suits mindless normies who don't even know what a dll is better since they don't have to worry about anything.
The main problem with package managers is that it's a pain in the ass to install software not shipped in repositories. Sure, you can compile from source, but then you may also have to fetch and compile dependencies, and maintain all of that yourself, defeating the purpose of a package manager.

and have 15 copies of each dll in your PC, with adware shipped in the installer. And then there's the goddamn registry keys all over the place and shit scattered all over AppData, ProgramData, and various other folders you don't know shit about instead of having a centralized directory, making trivial tasks such as, backing up settings or a save file, or changing settings not in the GUI a royal pain in the ass.

Self-contained packages (e.g. Docker, Snapcraft, Flatpak, AppImage) suffer from the same drawbacks as Wangblows's installers and ship duplicate, outdated copies of libraries everywhere.

Oh shit really? I noticed some user packages haven't seen updates in a while, but nothing serious.
Is this going to be a major problem going forward? I've kept my machine running smoothly for 4 years, not really in to mood to set up another fucking OS.

It might have to do with the rampant hostility on the Arch Forums and Arch subreddit. Everyone's so toxic & pretentious I find myself not even searching there for help; people may have lost interest and are moving on to some other distro.

Isn't Tor an AUR package? Arch themselves doesn't have shit to do with it. If the maintainer is garbage, that's on him and him alone.

Debian has a good solution to this. I think it's called Torbrowser-Launcher. With that, it doesn't matter how stable or unstable you make it, TOR will always be up to date.
Plus you can call it from dmenu, which is nice

archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/tor/

it was just updated a few minutes ago

Not even Linus is that picky.

that's upstreams problem, if they don't tell you what the dependencies are then it's their failure and fuck whatever their software is.

when i used to use arch i also noticed a lot of aur packages are just binaries, chrome, firefox, etc. you can't assume whats' in the aur is actually building from source.

That's why you read the fucking PKGBUILDs!

if i wanted binaries i'd just download the binaries from the source that 99% of the time provides them, not use aur's broken pgkbuild. arch is garbage.

install gentoo

You at least want some minimal infrastructure like BSDs /usr/ports provides.

but that is exactly what is happening. holy shit you retarded fuck. inform yourself about what the aur is and how it works

...

...

Arch was a flavor of the month. Everyone moved on to something else. I don't know what the draw of these half-assed distros is to you. They seem to just be for people for whom Debian was too hard or wanted to be a special snowflake.

bait

...

...

What's even the difference between working Debian or Arch? Except from package management/update release, they're neaely identical, only with Arch having a few less things working out of the box. Please tell me what on Debian would be in any way different from Arch on practical terms, that would make you even have such idea.

fixed

...

Debian is more flexible. Not even joking.
But you're responding to bait.

Not even fucking Wine is up to date.

just use the AUR goy!
aur.archlinux.org/packages/wine-stable/

let some random dump shit all over your system. don't compile wine from source yourself, that's too hard. let [email protected] do it for you.

The development branch is better.

...

Debian has more structure, engineering, and discipline. That comes with a cost in complexity. As an example, setting up your own signed repository, debuild slaves, reproducible build metadata, and working with gbp is significantly more difficult than shitting out something for AUR which isn't much more than ports. But the quality of the result will be far higher with a Debian-style process.
Some of the benefit is really just in excluding people who aren't at that level.

You know you can use a package manager to find the dependencies for you. APT, DNF, and many others allow this.

define "up to date"

As if you can't host your own binary pacman repositories.
Debian packaging is autistic, even Red Hat packaging is better.
I read that as "more backports" and maintainability nightmares that lead to shit like an incompetent retard commenting out PRNG code in OpenSSL.

This.

No harm done imo.

Not the latest version.

That's what the AUR is made for, dumb cunt.
If you want latest version, just install the fucking git version.

I want the latest stable release, nigger.

Then don't use a bleeding edge distro.

faggot

I am coming to this way of thinking also. I am starting to believe using macOS is a good compromise between the rigor of a unix-like system but the ease of Windows.

What?
Not only is unix not a very rigorous system design, macOS is not a very rigorous unix.
I can see the point of unix+werx, though.

pick one

pick zero because you suck at it

...

...

I can tell

Lol, im a girl

tits or gtfo

rude

install gentoo

So how else do I get muh new packages without resorting to Fedora or Tumbleweed? I can tell you what I hate about those if you want.

So is everyone else on this board. At least that's the best explanation I have found for how Holla Forums can't code for shit.

tits or gtfo