On Sun, 2007-11-25 at 05:56 -0700, Karl Larsen wrote: > Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > a book i'm reading contains the sentence: > > > > "It remains to be seen whether Apt will become the preferred tool for > > package management for RPM users." > > > > i was unaware that that was even a possibility. is it? > > > > rday > > > > ======================================================================== > > Robert P. J. Day > > Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry > > Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA > > > > http://crashcourse.ca > > ======================================================================== > > > > > That sounds like a writer with Debian experience and a feeling Apt > is easier than RPM. There are some things in RPM that are quite odd. I > think Apt is a simpler method. I have ubuntu-7.10 loaded and it uses Apt > and it seems to update as well as RPM. I know this may be a sily question but what does a file that apt installs look like. I mean what is its tag that identifies it as a file that can be installed? -- ======================================================================= If you have a procedure with 10 parameters, you probably missed some. ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx l
