Linked by Kroc Camen on Thu 1st Oct 2009 21:02 UTC
Permalink for comment 387675
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-10-04
This is true, but I think there have been two issues with all previous attempts:
1) All previous "universal package managers" (Autopackage, Zero Install, and Klik are the only ones I know of) were lacking features or ease of use. A universal package manager would need to be easy for end users and support multiple versions, advanced dependencies, non-root installation, and installation of both system software (libraries, daemons) and applications. As far as I know, no package manager satisfies these requirements (except possibly GoboLinux's package manager, but that is made specifically for GoboLinux).
2) A universal package manager would need the backing of at least one big distro. If Canonical supported it in Ubuntu, they could probably get most other distros to adopt it, since Ubuntu is by far the most common desktop Linux distro.
It may not be easy, but it would certainly be possible if the desktop Linux community cared enough.