[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [K12OSN] [reposted] yum OR apt - which?



On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 10:26, Rob Owens wrote:
> Thanks for the info.  I guess what I'm wondering is
> why attempt to replace the original (apt, I think)
> instead of improving it?  I guess the developers have
> their reasons, but it seems to me that re-writing
> instead of re-using defeats many of the benefits of
> open source.

Competition and choices are what drives improvement, so
I consider it a good thing.  As a more practical matter
I've had both get into confused states at different times
where they wouldn't work and was able to fix things by using
the other to update or fix some conflicting packages.

Up2date was the original but had the disadvantage of needing
a redhat network subscription.  Apt was probably the first
widely used substitute, but it had problems dating to its
Debian ancestry and is still unable to deal with mixed
architecture systems (some 64-bit packages, some 32). Yum
is written in python so it was easier for it's author to add
features and use the same rpm bindings as up2date. 

-- 
  Les Mikesell
   les futuresource com


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]