This thread is about a new dependency resolving package manager and it is posted in the Slackware forum. The lack of dependency resolution is one of the main advantages of Slackware for many Slackers, so of course dependency resolution will be a part of the discussion. The hardest part to implement for a resolving package management system is proper resolution of dependencies, especially when you implement rollback features, so it is not at all only a side effect that this package manager can resolve dependencies, it is purely intentional.

Neither package management nor dependency resolution are new ideas at all. So here is another package management system. Now what?

As I said, it brings out the worst in the fan boyz. maybe you should go and read the website about it. You will see it's not just about dependency resolution, but about a new way of dealing with software installation that just happens to incorporate it.

Here's a quote from it. You can't say that about building from source which very often breaks things.

Looking at what the developers are trying to achieve your right, it is another packaging system. The difference seems to be that they hope to eliminate the problems associated with other package management schemes, whether simplistic like Slackware, or complex like Debian et al.

No one is suggesting that even if it were successful in its apparent aims that one needs to use it.

So again I ask, what is everyone so afraid of? It's more or less a proof of concept at the moment anyway and as I said in an earlier post, an interesting project to watch.

I can't see problems with the Slackware package management system that need to be fixed. Would be nice if you give some examples.
Also, I never had problems with building from source breaking anything. Some example would be nice here, too.

no, thanks.
absolutely nothing personal, but I had enough of that kind of sh1t with a notorious OS from Redmond :)

Then you should have changed the update settings, I always tell my Windows install to just notify me if updates are available. No automatic downloads, no automatic installs.

:hattip:

:scratch:

I would prefer to hear from people who have experienced Guix, if any, than YABDADM (*)...

As a side note it is not surprising that Guile Scheme be used for extensions in a GNU project. As we see here :
(*) Yet Another Boring Discussion About Dependencies Management

It wasn't intended to be. It's just a trend I've seen in your past posts, that you continue to display on this thread as well.

Your previous statement says otherwise:
I never said he was without his OS for 12 months. I said the mistakes of others ended up hindering the end user rather than helping them. Not to forget that certain package managers will overwrite fixes by the system administrator by itself without the system administrator even knowing about it in worse scenarios.

If you look at older Slackware versions (I don't know how long you've been using Slackware), GNOME was a part of Slackware, so Pat once did do that with GNOME, so there's very little depth to that volume you speak of. :)

As for your example scenario, the dependency resolving package manager gave him the information quicker, but if the package maintainers screwed it up again, then it's hampering the end user even longer.

Fanboys or not, Slackware chose not to resolve dependencies and that's in the documentation since the very early 90's. You're acting like that's a surprise for some reason.

Ask yourself, why are distributions with dependency resolving package managers so afraid to give up the dependency resolution? Even though time and time again, it becomes clear the package managers have made (and continue to make) mistakes, why don't they just give it up?

I want just to note that GUIX use something like Apple's MacOS/X software bundles for packages, then its philosophy is at huge distance of orthodox Slackware and even an typical Linux distribution like RedHat, Ubuntu or OpenSuSE...

To understand what I want to say, if you have installed VirtualBox or QtCreator, look how these apps are installed in your /opt... That is what is called an software bundle. ;)

Yeah, GUIX support dependency resolution, rollbacks and all the Santa's bells, BUT it is the GNU package manager, not an sine-die Linux package manager. And GNU is not equal with Linux Operating System, even we use the GNU user level tools. The GNU Operating System is called glorious HURD.

And, I personally, I do not care if GNU want an appleish package manager for its Hurd & Co., even I'm an supporter of introducing of dependency support* in Slackware.

* Read dependency support as in registration of them to make the life easy for an 3thy party dependency resolution app, not as in introducing RPM as default package manager.

But GUILE is almost never feasible. That's the reason, why this Guix thing will never get traction in Linux land. Remember GNU arch?

At last, the voice of reason from someone who gets it.:hattip:

The fact that it is a GNU system means there will conceivably, but not necessarily, be the possibility of inclusion in a GNU/Linux (for that is what all distributions are) distribution at some time in the future. However far ahead that might be.:)

From the roadmap, apparently later next year:

The difference is that on the other notorious OS from Mountain View this system works pretty well, plus it's a proper Linux OS, once you switch the Chromebook to developer mode.

At the end of the day the primary job of a package management is to provide the user with sufficient software to have a productive system. I see nothing wrong with making this process transparent to the end user if it achieves the goal.

I am dual booting Chrome OS and Slackware and I have the best of both worlds.

GNU arch wasn't written in guile.