I agree. I am never bothered if someone (nicely) sets me straight on something, and I am always amazed at the knowledge level on these lists. THanks guys... Cheers Marc On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 12:36:46 -0500 (EST), Elliot Lee <sopwith@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > It's great to see well-informed answers to fedora-list questions. We need > more people like Deron :-) > Kudos, > -- Elliot > On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Deron Meranda wrote: > > > On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:00:47 -0500, Marc M <linuxr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > RPMs are for Redhat-based distributions only, > > > > Red Hat sponsored the development of the RPM format and software, > > but it is no longer just for Red Hat distributions. In fact, some people > > use RPM on commercial Unixes (non-Linux). > > > > But as said, the main reasons RPMs tend to be specific to a > > particular distro are, > > > > 1. Assumptions made about system configuration, such as > > pathnames to config file locations, boot script setups, existing > > users and groups, and so on. > > > > 2. Dependencies on other packages, including how those > > packages are named, compiled, or even in some cases > > where they are installed or what patches have been made > > to the virgin source. > > > > And of course the usually unstated: testing. Making sure > > that all the different packages do in fact work well together > > and don't cause conflicts. > > > > Thus, the "portability" of an RPM is mostly a factor of > > how self-contained the software is, versus how much > > it has to depend on or integrate into the rest of the > > system. For instance RPMs for man pages tend to > > be very portable, while an RPM for something complex > > like X is not too portable. > > > > -- > fedora-list mailing list > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list >
