[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian vs Red Hat??? I need info.

> Previously Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> > Actually, from what I've been told, rpm has at least one serious
> > technical flaw: The order of execution for pre-install and
> > post-install scripts is nonsensical for upgrades.

> > On Thu, 18 May 2000, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > I wouldn't call it nonsensical, but the way dpkg does it is definitely
> > more robust. I need to take another close look at how rpm and dpkg
> > differ in this respect anyway, so if people are interested in the little
> > details I might be willing to write a little comparison about it..

On Thu, 18 May 2000, Stephen A. Witt wrote:
> I, for one, would be very interested in this comparison. 

Like many others, installed Slackware as my first Linux installation.
I went looking for something better and found Debian.  The package
management has consistently improved over the years.  

I have only one RedHat installation, and studied the various package
management tools they had available.  The focus of the tools appeared to
assume that you had a full distribution available locally.  With
'kickstart', that perspective would be consistent the requirement to
deploy file and print servers on a LAN.  For updating, I used 'rpmfind'
like I would 'apt-get' ... but found no equivilent to 'dselect'. 

Dpkg/Apt is stiving to be able to update a running system on the fly.  It
routinely provides me a list of both new and updated packages.  Most
security fixes are "in" before I get email from the redhat-security
mailing list.  I recently completed an upgrade from a slink (2.0.34
kernel) to potato (2.2.14) with minor trouble ... that I could have
avoided if I was more skillful. 

What I like most about Debian Package distribution is the classifications
of "main", "non-free", "contrib" and "non-US".  It tells me something very
important about the software I am using.  It represents to me a practical
implementation of the goals of the Software in the Public Interest.  This
organization extends and expands on the objectives of the Free Software
Foundation, makes it possible for our small business to exist and
is, for me, the Open Source "guarantee".

For pre/post install questions, I am most interested in how closely any
given installed package adheres to the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS).
Portability between packaging systems as defined by support for the FHS
would appear to be a valid evaluation criteria.

Gerard MacNeil, P. Eng                          macneil@supercity.ns.ca
System Administrator
Supercity Internet Services                     http://www.supercity.ns.ca

Reply to: