Re: yum/apt-get

[Kelson Vibber <kelson speed net>]

At 10:08 AM 5/12/2004, Raphael Clifford wrote:
> From a completely practical point of view of the end user you will notice 
> two main differences between yum and apt-get.
>
> 1) Yum has very few options. Look at the man page to see what I mean. The 
> only documented (and non-deprecated) yum commands on my system are 
> "install, update, check-update, list, info, provides, search, clean" plus 
> mostly debugging flags.
> 2) Yum is very slow for any sizeable update and even downloading headers 
> can take a long time (over an hour in some cases) if you haven't done it 
> for a while

I'd like to add:
3) Apt-get has better front-ends.  If all you're doing is grabbing updates, 
yum and apt-get seem about equal.  But for finding and installing software, 
apt-cache and Synaptic (a GUI front-end to apt-get) are hard to beat.

FWIW, I've ended up using apt-get and synaptic on desktops (most of which 
are running Fedora Core) and yum on servers (most of which are running RHL 
with Fedora Legacy).

Hmm... Has anyone considered setting up a Red Carpet repository using the 
tools at http://opencarpet.org/ ?


Kelson Vibber
SpeedGate Communications <www.speed.net>