Re: deb vs. rpm
In foo.debian-user, you wrote:
> So if I understand you and others who have replied correctly, the
> main advantage is the automatic dep-resolustion via ftp.
> But it seems to me that this has nothing to do with the deb format
> itself. Instead it is something that results out of Debian making
> better use of the features of the packageformat.
> I guess you could write a program like apt-get for rpm too.
>
> As I see it after reading the comparison at
> <http://kitenet.net/~joey/pkg-comp.html>
> the rpm format is comparible with the dep format feature-wise.
> Rpm is even ahead in some (IMHO important) areas like
> file-dependencies whereas dep only supports package deps.
> The area in which dep is better in an important area is
> recommendations/suggestions.
>
> So maybe RedHat (and others) only do not make use of the features
> that rpm offers, while dep-Packagers do.
> Also with deps you can be sure that they are comptible with your
> Debian system, something not the case with rpms.
>
> Am I missing someting here?
That sounds about right.
-Mitch
Reply to:
- References:
- Re: deb vs. rpm
- From: "Thorsten Manegold" <Thorsten.Manegold@stud.uni-regensburg.de>