[Madlug] Linux for dummies

Matthew Callaway matt at kindjal.net
Fri Sep 13 20:34:11 CDT 2002


I also love the RPM package system.  I can't speak much to DEB however.

I will say this, Debian has announced its plans and intentions to become
LSB compliant.  This must included dealing with RPM in some fashion, as
rpm is the standard used in LSB.  Perhaps this will mean more
development efforts toward apt-rpm and what-have-you.

We'll see I suppose.

For what it's worth, I would not recommend Debian to a newbie.  I
fricking hate the installer.  Apt is cool and all, but by itself it's
not enough to sway me.  up2date works just fine.

MC

On Fri, 13 Sep 2002, Mark Tinberg wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Sep 2002, Timm Murray wrote:
> 
> > On Friday 13 September 2002 10:22, Will Benton wrote:
> > > One thing to keep in mind is that, with apt for RPM, Red Hat is now
> > > probably just as good as Debian in non-space-constrained environments.  The
> > > installer is pretty easy, as well.
> > 
> > That solves the user interface of RPM, but DEB is widely regarded as a more 
> > flexible package format.  For instance, RPM doesn't have "recommended" and 
> > "suggested" packages, only "required".  For the programs that run when a 
> > package in unpacked, DEBs support using a compiled program to do the work, 
> > but RPMs only support a shell script.  DEBs also have a "prority" section.
> > 
> > This page looks like a good overview of the various package managers:  
> > http://www.kitenet.net/~joey/pkg-comp/
> 
> Personally I like RPM as a package file format better than DEB, I wish
> that the Debian project would add the few bits of metadata
> (Recommends/Suggests, better boolean dependancies, priority, etc.) and all
> those helper scripts like update-* as well the better DPKG config file
> handling, to RPM and then switch.  I find RPM format packages easier to
> build, the RPM command line tools easier to use and it it supported 
> throughout the larger community.
> 
> I think it would help with the LSB and UnitedLinux reference distro, 
> because of its over all quality and attention to detail, Debian would 
> pretty much be the LSB reference, taking some of the burden of maintenance 
> and contrib packaging off of core Debian volunteers.  Personally I think 
> it would be best if all the major commercial distributors, and Debian, 
> would work together to create a solid reference distro with all the basic 
> tools/libraries.  Packaging stuff so it integrates properly for multiple 
> distros is still a pain.
> 
> Rant rant rant, rave rave rave.  I'll shtup now 8^)
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mark Tinberg <MTinberg at securepipe.com>
> Network Security Engineer, SecurePipe Inc.
> Remember:  Wherever you go, there you are!
> Key fingerprint = AF6B 0294 EE33 D802 F7A1  38A4 CF52 5FE0 7470 E5F7
> 
> 	Your daily fortune . . . 
> 
> The nice thing about Windows is - It does not just crash, it displays a
> dialog box and lets you press 'OK' first.
> (Arno Schaefer's .sig)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Madlug mailing list  -  Madlug at madisonlinux.org
> http://www.madisonlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/madlug
> 




More information about the Madlug mailing list