Talk:Pacman (package manager)

message: The first paragraph states that this article is about the pacman developed by the Arch Linux devs and community, but later in the article says that Frugalware also uses pacman. This is not the case. Frugalware uses *a* pacman, but it is a fork/complete rewrite of the one the article claims to be talking about. Does anyone else think this is worth changing?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by DigitalKiwi (talk • contribs) 21:35, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This is fixed now. -- strcat (talk) 16:36, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: In regards to Frugalware

message: "There is an unrelated package management system called BU pacman."  It has nothing to do with pacman and was removed from this page.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.107.183.203 (talk) 18:51, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  BU pacman 

message: I moved the following from the article:
:Pacman has recently ported to other systems such as DragonFly BSD. The DragonFly port is currently in a working alpha phase.
To make sense, this sentence should be accompanied by a description of which systems Pacman already runs on.--Chealer 03:02, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ports 

message: Given the explanation on this page, I don't see how it's different from any other Linux package manager. 201.212.44.26 04:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's much more flexible, and is very configurable. If you've ever tried it, you can tell it's different. It manages dependencies with out pinning you down to using one package. If you want to know what it's like, try it. Laurielegit (talk) 07:39, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hmm? 

message: :Image:Pacman arch.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 16:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Pacman arch.png

message: Why is there a section on GUI tools? While this might be useful to someone it's not very interesting or remarkable, and it's one more thing to have to keep up to date... I'd just as soon delete it. --59.129.221.98 (talk) 17:32, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  GUI Value? 

message: in spanish equivalent article a table with ALL releases (date and version from the 1.0 to 4.0.0RC2) are available, is noone oppose, I translate tose table to this language (and artivle)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.20.4.216 (talk) 23:10, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table 

message: Why isn't the name of the package manager a proper noun, Pacman? And pacman being the name of the executable (used when invoking it from the command line) --Mortense (talk) 10:45, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why isn't it a proper noun?