Linked by Tom5 on Tue 5th Mar 2013 22:01 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes 0install 2.0 is out today. Zero Install is a decentralised cross-platform software installation system, allowing software developers to publish programs directly from their own websites, while still supporting shared libraries, automatic updates, dependency handling and digital signatures. It complements, rather than replaces, the OS' package management. Departing from its traditional use of installing desktop applications, many of the new features were driven by requirements from the Ryppl project, which is using 0install as the package manager in a modular build system for C++ projects.
Thread beginning with comment 554318
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Looks interesting
by Tom5 on Wed 6th Mar 2013 13:14 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Looks interesting"
Member since:

Thanks for the mirror, but I saw that version 1.14 was there just 1 hour ago and hasn't been downloaded by anyone (you put it there especially for me?)

I've also linked it from the front page. It still says zero downloads now, so I guess stats don't update in real-time.

All newer versions seem only for Linux, so it seems clear where the focus of this project is.

The Windows version generally lags by a month or two, although it also has extra features (e.g. the catalog stuff). It's not quite the same as the POSIX version, although it shares some of the code and can process the same packages.

And again, a zero-installer that requires an installer and cannot even provide that simply screams "stay away, we don't want you as a user"

Many installers (pip, easy_install, cabal, maven, etc) work this way, requiring you to install the installer before you can use it.

There was a project to change that (dynamically generating an installer for the user's platform), but it's not ready:

0install probably mostly makes sense where you've got a lot of packages to install. For example, current users include Ryppl (managing hundreds of C++ modules), Sugar (desktop environment) and ROX (desktop environment). Or, if you have lots of versions (e.g Armagetron publishing frequent snapshot builds).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Looks interesting
by Luminair on Thu 7th Mar 2013 02:50 in reply to "RE[6]: Looks interesting"
Luminair Member since:

"Other people did it" is not a good reason for something named "zero install" to have an installer. Though someone who thinks like this being involved with the project could be.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: Looks interesting
by Tom5 on Thu 7th Mar 2013 09:15 in reply to "RE[7]: Looks interesting"
Tom5 Member since:

Well, the original plan (back in 2003) was that 0install would come pre-installed with your Linux distribution. Programs distributed this way would then be zero install.

In a similar way, "zero install" web-applications still require an install if your computer didn't come with a web browser...

But renaming the project after ten years doesn't seem like a good use of limited volunteer time. Besides, if it becomes pre-installed by default in future, then we'd have to rename it back again...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: Looks interesting
by gfxmonk1 on Fri 8th Mar 2013 05:15 in reply to "RE[7]: Looks interesting"
gfxmonk1 Member since:

"Zero install" refers to the stuff it runs - once you have Zero Install, you can run Zero Install feeds (/packages) without any installation step for those applications.

Of course, there's a feed for Zero Install itself ( ). But that's not going to do you much good until you have a copy of Zero Install to launch it with.

Compare with RPM - if your OS doesn't come with it, you need to install RPM and then install the packages you want (1 further install step for each package you want).
If your OS doesn't come with Zero Install, you need to install it and then you can run any zero install feed (0 further install steps, ever).

Reply Parent Score: 2