On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 08:46:02AM -0400, Philippe A. wrote: > I would like to know why was yum choosen to be distributed in fedora instead > of apt-get. I started with apt-get before knowing yum existed and was > actually delivered with my dist. When I gave yum a try, I was disappointed. > Its verrry slooow, and it seems not to be doing much more. I've read from > kde-redhat maintainer apt-get is no longer developped, but other than that, > what are the main differences between the two tools? "No longer developed" is a pretty strong reason. Howver, the killer feature is that apt-get was at the time unable to deal with multilib systems (i386 binaries on x86_64). There's actually been some development since then, and it does have rudimentary support now. > I don't want to start passionnate debate here. I simply want to understand > yum better and the reasons motivating the choice of a tool over another. Have you looked at the apt-get source code? It's a very complicated codebase, and the grafting-in of RPM support didn't help that. Yum, on the other hand, was designed from scratch in very readable Python. This makes it a lot easier to improve, making it a better base for going forward. Performance is still a weak point, but with every release that gets better. -- Matthew Miller mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx <http://mattdm.org/> Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
