4 ms·
Isn't KDE similar in that regard? I don't really know, but when I installed a couple of KDE programs, pacman pulled a hundred KDE packages.
by ykonstant 3y ago
Isn't KDE similar in that regard? I don't really know, but when I installed a couple of KDE programs, pacman pulled a hundred KDE packages.
- sho_hn 3y agoI'd argue that is more a symptom of applying the UNIX philosophy, if anything. A lot of those "hundred KDE packages" are very tiny, highly modular libraries that do "one thing". And no, the apps don't depend on the shell. In fact it's often the distros asking us to go a bit more monolithic again to ease the packaging overhead.
- spookie 3y agoThose packages are separate because the system is modular. I assure you, it's more difficult for the team to do it like this, and in many ways it's a welcome feature. The package number might seem insane, but compare the aggregate size of them vs other DEs. It's still not a fair comparison, but it's arguably better than the number of packages. Either way, many package managers provide groups or patterns to make it easier for an end user to maintain their system. Pacman does have such a feature. Look, for example, do you prefer to be able to install SDDM just because you like the themeing capabilities, and be able to do so, with just the bare minimum packages; or, install GDM and having to pull the whole GNOME DE as a requirement?