Off-Topic > SCM EXtensions

SCM Basics

<< < (18/22) > >>

cast-fish:
Hello

do you think that "many more" apps from the app store will end up in the SCM browser?

Scm browser seems so convenient for a tinycore user.

Scm is simple, clean and with it's advantages. For me particularly, scm browser totally simplifies some understanding
of how to use tinycore to my advantage.

i expect it's down
to many factors right?...not least of which is the complexity of shifting tcz's into .scm files (maybe it's not possible for certain apps?)

thanks

V.

SunBurnt:
I think all new scm builds are a good way to go, following Jason W`s thought that using tcz files can be hazardous.

A relatively complete list of of the best scm apps. in each category should be built to supplement the list of tcz apps.
Ideally over time scm would become Tiny Core`s main and maybe only app. package format, why have many?

The advantages of scm files are well known and they`re obviously superior to any other package type I`m aware of.
Standard packages; .tar.gz, .deb, .rpm, etc., are legacy old school and are relics of a bygone era really.
Puppy Linux`s .sfs files come close to a good package, but use the union file system that`s complex and unneeded.
If it weren`t for the "many Linuxes, many builds" problem, scm type files could work with any Linux distro. ( portable ).

cast-fish:
yes....if .scm apps can be built right away...why bother with .tcz builds of any new apps?

as for existing .tcz apps getting converted to .scm apps....it would be fantastic to see it happen for
every single .tcz app

i know of newcomers to tinycore who instantly can work with SCM browser no worries....its intuitive "one file" approach is exactly what people want

V.

gerald_clark:
You assume you speak for everybody.
Scm is not the be-all end-all you claim.

cast-fish:
sorry you feel that way

V

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page