[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       mageia-discuss
Subject:    Re: [Mageia-discuss] rpm or deb?
From:       Carlos Daniel Ruvalcaba Valenzuela <clsdaniel () gmail ! com>
Date:       2010-09-26 21:55:51
Message-ID: AANLkTi=SvMe08T=3a-M6yRPnJ6XxjerVzLqafWQQrKmp () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

I personally found no practical advantage of using apt-get vs urpmi,
while apt has many nice features urpmi is also solid and works
perfectly in most common cases, the only problem you may have is with
malformed packages or with erroneous dependency information, in which
case the only advantage of apt-get is the fact that Debian takes a lot
of care of having correct and working packages, which most RPM based
distros does too (you may get problems with 3th party repos but that
is another problem).

Being a Mandriva fork we would logically stick with it's tools and
packaging system.

Regards,
Carlos Daniel Ruvalcaba Valenzuela

On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Kristoffer Grundström
<kristoffer.grundstrom1983@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why not create a new format with the best of both worlds (if possible)?
>
> .mageia ?
>
> Hoyt Duff skrev 2010-09-26 19:44:
>
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 7:13 AM, RAVI KUMAR BALASUBRAMANIAM
> <ravikumar17jan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> only thing i hate about mandriva is its rpm based packages
> i prefer apt and deb personally
>
>  I can understand a personal preference, but why do you believe that
> deb is superior to rpm? Given that Mandriva is already rpm-based, what
> benefit could be derived from abandoning the existing build system and
> urpmi?
>
> >From everything I have read, neither system has a clear advantage over
> the other, and the end result of using either is essentially the same.
> I don't believe that changing to a deb-based system would provide any
> significant benefit to justify the expense in terms of re-training
> devs and  creating a new build system.
>
>

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]