3 ms·
Struggling to see the difference with chocolatey.. both do the same thing: download some binaries and install stuff, run arbitrary scripts for whatever they nee
by Jenk 6y ago
Struggling to see the difference with chocolatey.. both do the same thing: download some binaries and install stuff, run arbitrary scripts for whatever they need, track dependencies, versions, etc.
In fact it took far too long for chocolatey to even consider _uninstall_ that it was a total mess for years while maintainers played catch-up.
- asperous 6y agoThe biggest difference is chocolatey is designed around admin installs. Even the command line tool needs to be run with admin rights. The advantage is things are installed the way Windows expects. Scoop, by contrast, keeps everything user level and installs programs to its own folder in Documents aiming to portable. Scoop is a fair amount simpler and doesn’t have any sort of pro version to upsell you on. Scoop’s catalog is smaller but still pretty well managed.
- imiric 6y agoThe link mentions the differences, though they obviously target similar functionality. One key difference is that there's no such thing as a Scoop "package", unlike with Chocolatey. You can't build a file that can be moved and installed offline, since Scoop downloads and extracts it from a URL. I suppose you could setup a local proxy and workaround it, but it's not the main use case. I use both since Scoop is limited in the installers it supports, preferring Scoop when a program is available there.