4 ms·

And C has a solution for that: Package: tarball of code. Manage: download tarball of code and build/install libraries using configure/make. Then tell the comp

And C has a solution for that: Package: tarball of code. Manage: download tarball of code and build/install libraries using configure/make. Then tell the compiler where the headers are and the linker where the libraries are. Easy peasy! (OK, we know it’s not quite _that_ easy in many cases.) The elephant in the room is that people on HN and elsewhere violently nod about the need for a “proper package manager” when they are actually in disagreement about what a “proper package manager” needs to do. Meanwhile, it turns out that you can do without one, as the C community and all the “non-proper package managers” out there amply demonstrate.

pjc50 5y ago
The nearest thing to a standard solution may be autoconf, which is horrendous. C targets an incredibly broad spectrum of hardware and software platforms, compiler implementations, and OS layouts. That's both blessing and a curse. I think it would be worth at least trying to converge on a "package" system, even if it takes the next 20 years.
- bscphil 5y ago
  > The nearest thing to a standard solution may be autoconf I believe that is changing. A quite large number of influential projects have standardized on Meson. That includes systemd, Xorg, PipeWire, GLib, libui, hexchat, pacman, and (almost) all Gnome projects. It seems fair to say that most people (a) like it, and (b) see it as the most likely path forward for build systems.