Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 11th Mar 2006 21:26 UTC, submitted by Maarten Vanheuverswyn
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu The 5th preview release of Ubuntu Dapper Drake is out on the mirrors. As usual, there are both install and live CD's for PowerPC, x86, and x86-64. "We are now in the final stages of Dapper Drake development. Everything is stabilizing, and Ubuntu 6.04 will certainly be a top-notch professional OS. Now that all of the lower level improvements have been made, it is time to close the hood and rub on a coat of wax. With Flight 5 comes a new and improved Human look-and-feel, a few new GUI power tools, and much more." Update: Screenshot tour.
Thread beginning with comment 103548
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: What makes Ubuntu better?
by leech on Sat 11th Mar 2006 23:23 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: What makes Ubuntu better?"
leech
Member since:
2006-01-10

I can answer to why someone would like Debian packages over RPMs. I have had RPM databases become corrupted several times. Debian packages are far more friendly to third part repositories, with third party RPMs a lot of times it will totally hose your system, and since Debian in general has a ton more packages, you only need a few from third party repositories in general.

Leech

Reply Parent Score: 4

ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

RPM has a lot more overrides, and it doesn't tell you later you're stupid for having used them.
Dpkg will constantly tell you its broken and you need to remove that package you overrode it on before it'll install new packages. This is why I hate deb's. I'll take rpm over deb any day of the week, it's a far more flexible system.

And yes, you can hose your system with a bad rpm. That's why I like it!

But Ubuntu is aimed at inexperienced users as much as experienced once. So deb is likely a much better choice. There also aren't nearly so many bad debs out there as the debian repo's have long been the most complete.

That's why I like RPM over deb. And for the record, I like a good slackware tarball even better ;) . But my favourite package format has been arch's. Pacman isn't terribly robust, but oh well, it also doesn't think it's smarter than me!

Reply Parent Score: 2

Joe User Member since:
2005-06-29

But Ubuntu is aimed at inexperienced users as much as experienced once

You gotta be kidding. I tried to install Ubuntu earlier this year with the online manual, and it was way too complicated to me. I gave up.

I guess it is a distro aimed at developpers, but definately not for the average joe user.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Dark_Knight Member since:
2005-07-10

Ma_d,

Re: "RPM has a lot more overrides, and it doesn't tell you later you're stupid for having used them. Dpkg will constantly tell you its broken and you need to remove that package you overrode it on before it'll install new packages. This is why I hate deb's. I'll take rpm over deb any day of the week, it's a far more flexible system."

Are you referring to dependency checker which is available in package managers such as YAST that also checks for digital signatures? Unless you're comment regarding "more overrides" refers to using the force command to install packages. If so then I would not recommend this method to someone installing software, especially someone new to Linux.

Re: "And yes, you can hose your system with a bad rpm. That's why I like it!"

I use SUSE Linux a RPM based distribution and I found your comment not logical. An end user would not typically want to corrupt their data by intentionally force installing a binary package that they know may cause havoc on their system. Anyway it is possible to repair a RPM based distribution which I'm sure is also possible on Debian based distributions such as Ubuntu Linux.

Re: "That's why I like RPM over deb. And for the record, I like a good slackware tarball even better ;) . But my favourite package format has been arch's. Pacman isn't terribly robust, but oh well, it also doesn't think it's smarter than me!"

No matter if a consumer chooses to use a RPM based distribution such as SUSE Linux or a Debian based one such as Ubuntu Linux I'm sure most of us would agree using a binary package (ie: packagename.rpm) is similar to using "packagename.exe" for Windows. Though ease of use is unlikely when choosing to use tarballs or compiling from source. The reason being command scripts are rarely if ever needed on modern Linux distributions that provide a simple GUI package manager to ease installation and removel of binary packages.

Edited 2006-03-12 08:03

Reply Parent Score: 1

dark child Member since:
2005-12-09


I can answer to why someone would like Debian packages over RPMs. I have had RPM databases become corrupted several times. Debian packages are far more friendly to third part repositories, with third party RPMs a lot of times it will totally hose your system, and since Debian in general has a ton more packages, you only need a few from third party repositories in general.


If you install an rpm not meant for you distro then of course your system can get hosed. Remember that most Debian based distros use the same base, but many rpm based distros are completely independent entities.

Also Debian users are not immune from having their systems hosed by third party repositories. It just depends on the quality of packages and the amount of testing that they have gone through.

Reply Parent Score: 1