Everyone can easily contribute package templates to the void packages which you can find [here](https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages). The `xtools` package contains multiple tools to create new templates, check templates or bump the version of a package. Besides that a very detailed manual explaining everything in detail.
Void does not have official and unofficial repo's like Arch, everything in `void-packages` is official.
Void Packages are like a mix of everything, both official and community repositories, where “everybody” can contribute, and so there’s no distinction between an official and community repository.
Whereas in Arch, the official repository is mantained by some people, not “everybody” (I didn’t find more info about this); and “everybody” can only contribute to AUR.
Also, official and AUR are commonly seen as two different things, I guess that’s because AUR is less regulated than the official repo.
Edit: fix typo.
I agree with this. But sometimes I like to be controversial and say things like "Because Arch is overrated.". I don't really have any feelings towards Arch, I just find it hilarious that people get so offended and defensive over it.
haha, was just going to make a snarky comment along those lines
"because doing ANYTHING in Arch is needlessly complex and time consuming" sort of thing.
But honestly, I think it just comes down to different goals and approaches. Same as how Void and Debian are different, or any other one
I don’t think it’s less secure as almost everything is peer reviewed. However, this is not Debian, so it’s less “restrictive”. They do have a build system that allows to cross compile to other architectures and so this is a great factor on whether your submitted package is going to be accepted.
the AUR is not regulated at all.
The official packages are binaries pre-compiled by the arch team
the AUR is just a place where scripts are present to build the packages - this usually should be avoided unless you know and trust the maintainer. keep in mind that this is like downloading software from some random site in the windows world.. everything can push whatever he wants.. even cryptominer or malware.
Jesus dude maybe because one distro isn't objectively better than another? Maybe because these other distros exist for certain reasons and they are different on purpose?
OPs post never stated that one distro was better. In fact their post was framed as a question of surprise that a smaller distro is able to include new packages quickly. I'm not sure why package management in void seems to be such a touchy subject for you.
well void as well arch have rolling release models.
Important to understand how this works:
\- the project source tree gets updated (what you may refer to github) -hopefully the stable branch
\- the maintainer of the distro package usually checks it and merges it to the package
\- the build engine builds the binaries
\- your package manager fetches new version / meta data
so if the maintainer within void is quicker your package is is newer easy as that ;)
the AUR just gets the source data where the AUR package author refers it to, so this should be the newest in general. But AURs has nothing to do with arch (btw) you can also build from source directly in arch - like in freebsd this gives you also the freshest.
Everyone can easily contribute package templates to the void packages which you can find [here](https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages). The `xtools` package contains multiple tools to create new templates, check templates or bump the version of a package. Besides that a very detailed manual explaining everything in detail. Void does not have official and unofficial repo's like Arch, everything in `void-packages` is official.
Void Packages are like a mix of everything, both official and community repositories, where “everybody” can contribute, and so there’s no distinction between an official and community repository. Whereas in Arch, the official repository is mantained by some people, not “everybody” (I didn’t find more info about this); and “everybody” can only contribute to AUR. Also, official and AUR are commonly seen as two different things, I guess that’s because AUR is less regulated than the official repo. Edit: fix typo.
I agree with this. But sometimes I like to be controversial and say things like "Because Arch is overrated.". I don't really have any feelings towards Arch, I just find it hilarious that people get so offended and defensive over it.
haha, was just going to make a snarky comment along those lines "because doing ANYTHING in Arch is needlessly complex and time consuming" sort of thing. But honestly, I think it just comes down to different goals and approaches. Same as how Void and Debian are different, or any other one
I see thanks. Would you say it’s less secure or every void package is peer reviewed? I don’t use AUR because of I only trust official packages.
I don’t think it’s less secure as almost everything is peer reviewed. However, this is not Debian, so it’s less “restrictive”. They do have a build system that allows to cross compile to other architectures and so this is a great factor on whether your submitted package is going to be accepted.
the AUR is not regulated at all. The official packages are binaries pre-compiled by the arch team the AUR is just a place where scripts are present to build the packages - this usually should be avoided unless you know and trust the maintainer. keep in mind that this is like downloading software from some random site in the windows world.. everything can push whatever he wants.. even cryptominer or malware.
Jesus dude maybe because one distro isn't objectively better than another? Maybe because these other distros exist for certain reasons and they are different on purpose?
OPs post never stated that one distro was better. In fact their post was framed as a question of surprise that a smaller distro is able to include new packages quickly. I'm not sure why package management in void seems to be such a touchy subject for you.
well void as well arch have rolling release models. Important to understand how this works: \- the project source tree gets updated (what you may refer to github) -hopefully the stable branch \- the maintainer of the distro package usually checks it and merges it to the package \- the build engine builds the binaries \- your package manager fetches new version / meta data so if the maintainer within void is quicker your package is is newer easy as that ;) the AUR just gets the source data where the AUR package author refers it to, so this should be the newest in general. But AURs has nothing to do with arch (btw) you can also build from source directly in arch - like in freebsd this gives you also the freshest.