Python, Be Bold!
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 7:58 AM Michael Torrie <torriem at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/2/20 1:33 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > Using a package manager means you have ONE copy of the Python
> > interpreter, and all your scripts depend on it. If you update that
> > interpreter, ALL scripts benefit from the update. This is a solved
> > problem.
> Except that it's not actually a solved problem. We thought it was but
> then found the limitations. Linux distros are actually moving away from
> a pure packager dependency model, especially for applications. System
> components, yes. Makes a lot of sense. Makes less sense for user-facing
> things. That's why there's a lot of movement going with regards to
> solutions like flatpak, snap, and even AppImage. RPMs and debs are
> never going to go away, but they do have limitations for the kind of
> thing the OP is talking about.
They are still FAR better than trying to create a single bloated
executable that contains everything and magically knows how and when
to update itself. If you're going to use snaps etc, you do so with
full control of what you're bundling together, rather than hoping that
the publisher of the program will (a) bundle the correct versions, and
(b) keep them up-to-date.
I'm not seeing any Linux distro moving towards a model where every
program author has to include the entire binary and make 32-bit and
64-bit versions available, etc, etc, etc, as is often seen elsewhere.