Arthur Pemberton 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view is at best outdated but each to their own.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
There don't seem to be a bazillion independent .deb repositories with
conflicting contents, though, and more or at least equivalent total
content. Is that from fewer political/policy disagreements?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikeell@xxxxxxxxx
