On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 14:15 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote: > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 1:29 PM, Ian Chapman > <packages@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Arch Willingham 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 view is at best outdated but each to their own.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 I use Fedora at home and have done for many years. I installed Kubuntu for some family members and friends, and have recently installed it on my office machine where I had also used Fedora for many years. Neither system is problem-free, but [K]ubuntu tends to have far fewer dependancy issues. It's also significantly easier to upgrade the distro from one version to the next. I note that increasing numbers of third-party packages are easily available for [K]ubuntu and sometimes not so easily for Fedora. Take a look at getmiro.com for a typical example. Which distro do you think is better supported by the Miro devels? None of this should be taken as a showstopping argument, just my 2c. poc
