apt-rpm supported?

[Panu Matilainen]

On Thu, 6 Nov 2003, Michael P. Soulier wrote:

> On 06/11/03 Panu Matilainen did say:
> 
> > Apt-rpm is not at least currently supported in Fedora Core, however
> > a) you can safely expect various mirrors to provide "apt-rpm enabled"
> > repositories of it, including www.fedora.us and freshrpms.net.
> > b) there's work going on to create a generic repository metadata format,
> > meaning in practise any depsolver supporting that can be used to access
> > any repository using that format, at which point there aren't
> > yum/apt-rpm/up2date/red-carpet repositories, they simply become "package
> > repositories" which you can access with your favorite client.
> 
>     Ok, thanks. 
> 
>     Odd. I only looked into Fedora in the first place to use apt-rpm.
> I'm quite surprised to hear that it's not yet officially supported. As a
> long-time Debian user, it made me feel very comfortable on an rpm-based
> distro. 

Apt-rpm will be available in www.fedora.us repository as long as it's not
"officially" in Fedora Core or Extras (which is yet to materialize). It's 
just not there *yet*, though I hope to build shiny new package for it this 
evening once I've upgraded my box to FC1 first :)


>     Any good comparisons of the two? Can I install based on pathname,
> libname in yum? Is the search facility as good as "apt-cache"? 

I don't think *good* comparisons exist, some bad ones (completely 
different things on different distros tested and odd conclusions made 
based on totally invalid testing methods) are known to be out in the wild.
Both have their pros & cons, largely a matter of personal taste and what 
you've used to.

	- Panu -