OSX 的 .pkg 和 .pkg.mpkg 安装程序之间的差异
我正在与 OSX 的 packageMaker 作斗争，因为它不允许我创建“.pkg”。相反，它迫使我制作“.pkg.mpkg”。
这似乎是一个愚蠢的问题，我应该能够通过几次谷歌搜索来回答，但我无法找到关于此的太多信息。
谁能解释它们之间的主要区别，以及您是否知道必须使用其中之一的限制？
I'm fighting with OSX's packageMaker as it doesn't allow me to create a '.pkg'. Instead it's forcing me to make a '.pkg.mpkg'.
This seems like a stupid question I should be able to respond with a couple of google searches, but I'm not being able to find much info about this.
Could anyone explain the main differences between them and if you know the restriction for which you have to use one or the other?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（3）
据我所知，.pkg 文件是简单、直接的安装程序包。但是，.mpkg 文件非常可定制，并且可以链接到最终用户可以在安装程序中打开和关闭的多个 .pkg 文件。
我认为您看到的 .pkg.mpkg 双扩展名只是一个文本附加问题。软件包是 .pkg 或 .mpkg，而不是两者的组合。
To the best of my knowledge, .pkg files are simple, straightforward Installer packages. However, .mpkg files are very customizable, and can link to multiple .pkg files which the end user can turn on and off in the Installer.
I think the .pkg.mpkg double-extension you're seeing is just a text appending issue. Packages are either .pkg or .mpkg, not a combination of the two.
我相信 Collin Allen 是正确的——主要区别在于元包可以引用其他包。但至于你的 PackageMaker 问题，你尝试过 Iceberg 吗？这是一种我们通常比较幸运的替代方案（免费）：错误更少、更容易理解和使用、更大的自由度等等。
I believe Collin Allen is correct -- the main difference is that the metapackage can reference other packages. But as to your PackageMaker problem, have you tried Iceberg? It's an alternative (free) that we have had generally better luck with: fewer bugs, easier to understand and use, greater freedom, etc.
我没有一个好的答案，但是当我尝试修改用户看到的文本时，PackageManager 会自动从 .pkg 切换到 .mpkg。两者都包含供应商准备的子安装程序（.pkg）。
I don't have a good answer, but PackageManager automagically switched from .pkg to .mpkg once I tried to modify the text that the user sees. Both included sub installers (.pkg) prepared by vendors.