>installing software on linux will never be this easy
why use anything other than windows?
>>52047135
I'm not a pirate.
But that's exactly how easy it is on most londrix distris
Actually was harder on Windows because you had to install Chocolatey
>>52047135
>32bit software
>2015
>>52047135
why would you use that garbage? package managers destroy all the fun in installing new applications.
>>52047580
Because automatic updates are yummy.
>>52047135
>confirmations for running install script
What is this, an AUR helper? If you trust the package, shouldn't you trust the install script? Does the Chocolatey repository even have effective moderation, or is Chocolatey just an easy way to install malware? Are the packages even signed? Get a real package manager.
>>52047135
Why 32 bit?
>>52047585
You can use the -y flag to automatically install packages without confirmation.
>>52047597
So why does it warn you by default? Are Chocolatey packages not safe? Most Linux package managers don't warn you about install scripts because they are written by trusted package maintainers and signed. Also, it's kind of stupid to warn about install scripts, since if someone wanted to get malware on your machine, they could just put it in the program instead (and presumably get no warning.)
>>52047622
Because it lets you check the script by typing 3.
>>52047551
>x64
>Atom
Pick one.
>>52047638
Pick two on GNU+Linux
>>52047631
Yes, but why would you _need_ to check the script? Either the package is trusted or it isn't. If it is, you don't need to check the script. If it isn't, you have more than just the script to worry about. If Chocolatey packages can just be uploaded by randoms on the internet without any vetting process (I suspect this is the case,) and the packages are not signed, then Chocolatey is nowhere near as good as the average Linux package manager.
>>52047638
Atom devs can't get x64 builds working on Windows? As expected of Windows devs. You guys seem to have endless trouble porting your software to 64-bit.
Works in commandline or only in powershell?
>>52047659
powershell is a command line, retard
>>52047638
There've been x64 atoms for quite some time.
>>52047652
>text editor
>linux
>not emacs
>>52047638
AYOOO HOL UP
HOL UP
*smack lips*
SO YOU BE SAYIN
ATOM WINDOWS DOESN'T HAVE x86_64 BUILD?
>>52047668
no shit sherlock, but commandline isn't powershell
>>52047757
You're right. Command line is a term used to describe any text-based command-oriented interactive shell. Powershell certainly fits this definition.
>>52047766
He clearly means cmd.exe
>>52047583
Is that a pun?
>>52049404
obviously
Not everyone is a brainlet like you, OP
