[Users] {Bug 3630] Ubuntu PPA very much out of date

Ralf Mardorf silver.bullet at zoho.com
Sun Apr 3 23:40:14 CEST 2016

On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 22:02:32 +0200, Ricardo Mones wrote:
>On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 00:38:25 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>> since Arch follows upstream, IOW it doesn't split into tons of
>> grotesque packages.  
>You really wanted to mean that it doesn't allow users to select what to
>install while being unable to build upstream package to provide the
>user manuals…
>Oops! ;-)


you're confusing official packages that aren't split and simply follow
the name scheme from upstream, so nobody needs to search for
dependencies, that don't fit to the names from upstream and the content
you want or want not install, let alone packages you build yourself,
which is much easier to do than building a Debian/Ubuntu package.

Usually official Arch packages provide everything from upstream, there
are just a few exceptions, such as kernel packages, that usually are
split in image, header and docs packages, however, you either could use
the FreeBSD ports alike Arch build system and build spilt packages or
you simply use the not split packages from the official repositories
and assumed you don't want to install everything, you specify what you
don't want to install by pacman.conf.

I'm not aware of anybody who is familiar with building packages for
Debian/Ubuntu and Arch, who prefers the Debian/Ubuntu package policy
and management tools over the Arch package policy and
management tools. There might be one or the other, but I'm quite sure
most power users and maintainers prefer Arch's package policy and
package management tools over the Debian/Ubuntu once.


More information about the Users mailing list