On Thu, 2008-03-27 at 19:27 -0700, Timothy Payne wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Summerfield" <debian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: "For users of Fedora" <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 6:47 PM > Subject: Re: What's all the hype over Ubuntu? > > > > Ian Chapman wrote: > >> Les Mikesell wrote: > >> > >>>> But I must admit, I never really understood that viewpoint as yum has > >>>> basically eliminated "dependency hell" and wondered what was magically > >>>> different about deb. > >>> > >>> Try to find something that isn't included in the standard repository. > >>> With fedora, you won't even find the names of additional repositories > >>> documented, so you ask here. You'll get several different answers and > >>> if you are looking for Sun Java, none of them will apply. For anything > >>> else, like vlc or the Nvidia driver, you add all the recommended repos > >>> and tell yum to install something and you'll get rpm conflicts. With > >>> ubuntu, you enable the pre-configured extra repositories, pick what you > >>> want and you are ready to run it. > >> > >> So it seems it's more about packaging strategy and what distros offer, > >> rather than debs necessarily being inherently superior to rpm. I can > >> understand what you've said in the context of Fedora and Ubuntu but Suse > >> offers much of the same "non-free" stuff. Maybe Mandriva too I can't > >> remember. I'd always assumed they were referring to the days when you > >> tried to install program1.rpm which then said it needed libfoo.rpm, which > >> in turn needed libbar.so.1 which you had to figure how which rpm it was > >> in and so on, which is why I thought that viewpoint seemed outdated. > >> > > > > debs have different information, and the ability to have different > > strength dependencies: > > requires, like with rpm > > recommends - may work better with these > > suggests -- may work better with these. > > > > At one point (years ago) I had to install X on RHL to use Ghostscript. > > Complete nonsense of course, but dpkg might have handled that better. > > > > apt-get is about equivalent to yum, but does more such as download and > > (optionally) build source - it can get and install build deps too, it's > > quicker (at least with simple stuff) (at least with default options). > > apt-get (like up2date) can download updates without installing them: > > apt-get -yud dist-upgrade > > > > yum's tools might be equivalent, but it's a terrible mish-mash. AFAIK > > there's no proper equivalent _in yum_ to the above apt-get command which > > fetches all available updates and copes with adding new packages - it's > > not only for release upgrades equivalent to f8 to f9. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Cheers > > John > > > > -- spambait > > 1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Z1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > -- Advice > > http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php > > http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375 > > > > You cannot reply off-list:-) > > > > -- > > fedora-list mailing list > > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > > To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list > > > I'm not a programmer please keep that in mind, could a mirror be set up to > use apt? I used it on RH 7.3 @ Dag, and had forgot about it untlil then. > But I assume a mirror will need help for free from smarter people than I. You can already use apt-get (and synaptic etc.) on Fedora, as many of the repos offer apt-configured versions. Note that this is apt with RPMs, not with DEBs. poc
