Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 4th Jun 2007 16:38 UTC, submitted by anonymous
Thread beginning with comment 245217
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.




Member since:
2007-06-04
Hi Dean. :-) We address this on the forum posts over at Freespire related to the Linspire Letter that was sent out. In particular, my comment at:
http://forum.freespire.org/showthread.php?p=62301#post62301
The study was done on Linspire's distribution (warehouse). The distribution obviously does make a difference to what specific issues you'll see using APT, but I guarantee you no current distribution can protect you from APT's problems with dependency resolution...the problem of removals and failure to install can't be resolved with distribution-side QA checks because it's heavily dependent on the user's machine configuration. Furthermore, we offer optimization of the solution: we can find you the newest packages, the smallest packages, the highest rated packages, the most stable packages, whatever you can come up with to assign value to packages. This alone, even without the completeness and optimal removal guarantees, is a significant improvement on APTs heuristic approach.
So many distros go for an APT basis because APT is a whole lot better than a lot of the other options. Just because something is better than the other options doesn't mean we should decide against improving it for the future though: that's the anti-innovation mindset that OSS tries so hard to rebel against.