[Wolves] Fedora and apt

[Peter Cannon]

On Tuesday 26 July 2005 12:14, Simon Morris wrote:

I think the issue is one step back from (or up a level), its the type or way a 
user maintains their OS. If they're like me they'll prefer to do it 
graphically IMHO synaptic and Yast are the best for seeing what you're doing.

There will be a list of available packages with some blurb about them 
underneath (once you've highlighted that particular item).

I ran apt & synaptic for two years on this Fedora laptop and was very happy 
with it, when FC4 came out apt was not really available so I had to use yum.

Yum is OK but unless you've time to do yum search, pipe it all out to a file 
then look at the file see if theres anything there you fancy its a pain in 
the ar....

Of course for straight updating its easy. There is of course yum extender 
which gives a graphical front end but I don't think its as good as synaptic.

> I haven't used Red Hat or Fedora for a little while but I have some
> customers who do. apt-for-rpm is a 3rd party hack - has yum improved
> anything much?

Not much has changed other than the way repos are recorded of course you can 
add in extra sites such as dag, dagwieers is OK but once you have the .dag 
extension you can get problems with recognition.

> RPM simply isn't a package dependancy solution.. it's a packaging
> format. I think a lot of the problems with Red Hat is that there seems
> to be a smaller number of official packages so people hunt around for
> 3rd party ones with unknown consequences.

Pete tentatively responds, I don't get you're drift, the dependencies relate 
to the application contained within the rpm, as you rightly say rpm is just a 
package format. The problem is the application producer using things based on 
their setup distributing the said application without including vital bits 
like lib.so (example)

This is where people get into the realms of loading rpms that they don't 
really want just so they can get a single file/dependency.

Maybe there could be some sort of dependency repo so that every installed 
package says "ah thats missing OK I'll nip off to www.depend.repo.com and get 
that.

> There is no way you should *have* to remove components and then install
> them altogether.

I agree, but thats what happens when everyone does their own thing.

> Viva la debian!

Its good, but its not that good ;-)

-- 
Regards
Peter Cannon
Fedora Core 4 & Suse 9.3

"There is every excuse for not knowing,
There is no excuse for not asking!"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/wolves/attachments/20050726/8ebbbc85/attachment.bin