Re: Package System specification
On Fri, 14 Apr 2000, David Cantrell wrote:
> >Actually if anything its too simple since it lacks a couple of the handy
> >Debian 'maybe you also want' type items right now. RPM also offers very
> >important stuff like cryptographically strong verification of packages.
>
> And you only gain these features on a 100% RPM-based system. So what's
> the point?
The point is that the vast majority of people andvendors _want_ these
features. If your distribution doesn't support features like dependencies
and signed packages that's fine - use rpm2cpio to just get the files.
Oh, also, this isn't about standardizing on RPM the package manager,
complete with database - this is about standardizing on the _format_ - you
can easily convert the RPM format to Debian packages or tarballs. IIRC
'alien' will even preserve the dependencies for Debian (but don't quote me
on that).
Jeffrey.
o-----------------------------------o
| Jeffrey Watts |
| watts@jayhawks.net o-----------------------------------------o
| Systems Programmer | "We've all heard that a million monkeys |
| Network Systems Management | banging on a million typewriters will |
| Sprint Communications | eventually reproduce the entire works |
o----------------------------| of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the |
| Internet, we know this is not true." |
| -- Robert Wilensky |
o-----------------------------------------o
Reply to: