Re: Linux distro

On 8/1/07, Douglas McNaught <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org> wrote:
> Joseph S <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net> writes:
>
> > My small gripes about Ubuntu are:
> > 1) rpm, for all its faults, is still better than using apt
>
> You *must* be joking. In Debian and Ubuntu, I've never had a tenth of
> the dependency hell that you regularly hit with RPMs (though yum has
> improved things somewhat). Besides 'apt' and 'rpm' aren't directly
> comparable--'apt' is a wrapper around 'dpkg', which is the direct
> equivalent of 'rpm'.
>
> -Doug
>

Please don't start this. These issues are exactly why one should be
looking at an ENTERPRISE OS for a server. Fedora, ubuntu, etc... are
not enterprise OSes, and any discussion of such issues are certainly
off-topic for this mailing list. An enterprise OS has all of the
dependency issues ironed out already.

Incidentally, I really think that all of the "apt lovers" out there
jumped to Debian in the days before tools like yum existed, and have
not been paying attention to the changes made since. You are correct
that yum handles most of the dependency issues, and it is certainly on
par with apt in any modern system.