4 ms·

You can have multiple versions of the same deb package. Look for installed Linux kernels on your system and you'll likely find an example right there. This is

You can have multiple versions of the same deb package. Look for installed Linux kernels on your system and you'll likely find an example right there. This is actually a good example of the good definition of the problem space. All corner cases have been dug up. It's not a priori obvious that an operating system needs multiple versions of a package, but in some cases it does. And the package manager supports it.

sophacles 12y ago
You can have multiple versions of the same deb package. Look for installed Linux kernels on your system and you'll likely find an example right there. Not so much - they have to have different names. I couldn't have a package named, e.g., linux-kernel and install version 3.4, 3.5, etc, instead I have to install linux-kernel-$version, each of which is a different package.
- sergiosgc 12y ago
  You're getting caught up in implementation details. It fulfills the functional requirements in debian, shows that the problem is common to all package managers, it reveals that this corner case has been touched by deb and in the end reinforces my original points that: a) The requisites for most package managers out there are not that different (i.e. it's the same problem). b) We have the problem so beaten down that we should be able to properly define the solution boundary. Is the deb solution suboptimal? Probably. It's not relevant to the main point being argued.
  - stinkytaco 12y ago
    >You're getting caught up in implementation details. But if a package manager is anything, it's an implementation. It's not a theoretical concept, it's a tool that a user has to smooth the process of their work. Both could just install and configure packages by hand but it's the implementation that makes a package manager useful (for one being able to run multiple versions and for another being explicitly discouraged from multiple versions). Dismissing implementation details in a tool that is designed for implementation is missing the point.
- the_why_of_y 12y ago
  In the obviously far superior ;-) RPM world it's possible to have multiple "linux-kernel" packages with different versions installed at the same time.

sophacles 12y ago

You can have multiple versions of the same deb package. Look for installed Linux kernels on your system and you'll likely find an example right there. Not so much - they have to have different names. I couldn't have a package named, e.g., linux-kernel and install version 3.4, 3.5, etc, instead I have to install linux-kernel-$version, each of which is a different package.

sergiosgc 12y ago
You're getting caught up in implementation details. It fulfills the functional requirements in debian, shows that the problem is common to all package managers, it reveals that this corner case has been touched by deb and in the end reinforces my original points that: a) The requisites for most package managers out there are not that different (i.e. it's the same problem). b) We have the problem so beaten down that we should be able to properly define the solution boundary. Is the deb solution suboptimal? Probably. It's not relevant to the main point being argued.
- stinkytaco 12y ago
  >You're getting caught up in implementation details. But if a package manager is anything, it's an implementation. It's not a theoretical concept, it's a tool that a user has to smooth the process of their work. Both could just install and configure packages by hand but it's the implementation that makes a package manager useful (for one being able to run multiple versions and for another being explicitly discouraged from multiple versions). Dismissing implementation details in a tool that is designed for implementation is missing the point.
the_why_of_y 12y ago
In the obviously far superior ;-) RPM world it's possible to have multiple "linux-kernel" packages with different versions installed at the same time.