OT: Apt-get vs YUM?

[Kam Leo]

On 6/21/07, Mike McCarty <Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Kam Leo wrote:
> > On 6/21/07, Mike McCarty <Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Kam Leo wrote:
> >> > On 6/21/07, Mike McCarty <Mike.McCarty at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> >> > >> Could someone please state the relative advantages and
> >> >> >> > >> disadvantages of the apt-get and yum installation managers?
> >> > It's a matter of preference.
> >>
> >> That's why I asked for objective information, like a features
> >> list, rather than "Which is better?"
> >>
> >> > Yum: Has least built-in features of the three package managers
> >> [...]
> >> > Apt: A well integrated product with more built-in features than yum.
> >> [...]
> >> > Smart: New kid on the block. Still in beta. Feature rich. First to
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> Thanks. That's the type of information I was looking for. I've heard
> >> some interesting things about synaptic, like one guy was going to
> >> install some software, and it wanted to remove quite a bit. It seems
> >> that synaptic has a more comprehensive "I manage your machine for you"
> >> design philosophy than some care for.
> >
> >
> > Not true. It could have just as easily been yumex or smart-gui.
>
> How can you argue with me about this, when I stated no preference,
> nor stated that I had observed it? Do you disagree that
>
> (1) I have heard this, or
> (2) that such behavior seems more comprehensive than some want.
> If you disagree with either of these, then I can point you to a thread
> on a Debian support group where I responded to a message stating (1),
> and wherein another poster stated (2) about himself, which vindicates
> the use of the word "seems".

I am not disputing that the scenario you referenced cannot happen. I
am trying to correct the inference that this problem only happens when
using synaptic.

> > Dependencies vary with the package selected. Some are more entangled
> > than others.  Remember the GUIs are front ends for the package
> > managers and all of the package managers are front ends for rpm.
>
> The machine on which this was observed was a Debian machine, and
> doesn't even have rpm installed on it, so it is not the case that
> "all package managers are front ends for rpm"
>
> You seem to be very argumentative. I want to collect information.
> I don't have any axes to grind.
>
> Mike