Phil Schaffner wrote:
On Tue, 2004-11-23 at 09:45 -0600, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 09:52:16AM -0500, Phil Schaffner wrote: > >> On Tue, 2004-11-23 at 09:24 -0500, Mark Bradford wrote: >> >>> I have been using apt for installs and updating/upgrading, but >>> am noticing most of the conversation here seems to favor yum. >>> Is there any > >>> significant difference between the two, or are there any issues >>> or conflicts in using both? >> >> FC3 repositories seem to be dropping apt support, > > Which ones do such things! ???
OK - ya' got me. Should have said many FC3 mirrors do not have apt support. ATrpms, freshrpms, ... repos certainly do.
>> and apt does not handle multi-arch (i386 vs x86_64, PPC, ...). > > True :( > >> Has been some talk of an apt version able to use the new yum >> repository meta-data, but so far seems to be vaporware. > > Also true, but less painful than the (lack of the) multilib > support. > >> I've pretty much dropped apt in favor of yum, but apt/synaptic >> still seem viable for FC2 and earlier. > > It's also available for FC3, as well as yum/yum20 for FC2 and > earlier.
I do have apt loaded for FC3 and sometimes find it handles situations better than yum, or vice versa. Both can be useful tools.
Same here. They both have their plusses and minuses. I generally use apt though. I have yum with the default yum.conf file that was installed with it and leave it for Core updates. However, I generally get those along with my others with apt. I've tweaked the heck out of my sources.list file. I include the regular fedora repositories (including updates) and along with that I have all the "RPM forge" ones and lastly, kde-redhat.
My biggest issue is more of Synaptic vs not. Synaptic is sill in beta and it shows. It often fails on me (particularly with installs/upgrades) and I end up having to ditch it and finish things with apt. My only wish is that apt had an entry like Yum does that simply lists everything you can install. I do find apt to be a more efficient tool than yum though.
From what I've gathered it's just more efficient than yum, overall.
Scott
