> Throw away your Linux-ish idea of "everything is a package",

What the heck is wrong with that?

And why argue against, if you mentioned it in the first place? I was
just pointing out an inconsistency in how it was presented, as if /bin
wasn't managed by the package manager. Geez.

> and take a look at BSD systems, they provide tarballs for updating
> your system,

Whole system tarballs? So we're doing stable releases or big lumbering
version changes? If so, great. I'm out of here.

> which are maintain by the mainstream distribution, and are not under the
> risk of breaking because of a silly package manager mistake.

That's not an argument. You can break things with the other methods. You
blaming the package manager, or are you confusing it with all the
libpng's ABI or libsfml's ABI changed and half my packages are on the
old version bullshit?

> > Some of us currently use package managers that bootstrap the system
> > though.
> I have nothing against this, but I prefer the BSD way of doing it.

Can we just say "unpack a tarball?" [, chroot, configure]?

Reply via email to