On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 1:29 PM, Ian Chapman <packages@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Arch Willingham wrote: > > > I'm not trying to start a battle of which is better…just trying to get > > an idea of why its seems so popular. > > Well something else to throw into the pot along with the other answers, > on several occasions I've heard Ubuntu fans cite the fact it doesn't use > rpm (ubuntu uses deb) as one of the main reasons they use it because > they don't like the "dependency hell" of rpm. Personally I think that > view is at best outdated but each to their own. :-) > It's a ridiculous view point as in terms of dependencies rpms and debs are almost equivalent. Both are capable of causing dep problems. The only major diff that I am aware of is that devs have a concept of soft deps for optional packages -- Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine ( www.pembo13.com )
