Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 17th Nov 2009 16:22 UTC, submitted by diegocg
Fedora Core Fedora 12 has been released today. "I'm proud to announce the release of Fedora 12, the latest innovative Linux distribution from the Fedora Project, a global, collaborative partnership of free software community members sponsored by Red Hat."
Thread beginning with comment 395136
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
AdamW
Member since:
2005-07-06

"They've been trying to fix it forever,a nd this is just another attempt."

What do you mean by 'this'?

I really don't get the big hoohaa over package management. Took me about two days to switch from urpmi to yum. Figured out what the equivalent commands were and it was fine. I don't sit there with a stopwatch figuring out which is faster, they both get the job done. *shrug*

Reply Parent Score: 2

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

What do you mean by 'this'?

Fedora updates not only consume far more bandwidth and time, but break the system far more often due to their extreme volume. The Fedora folks are trying to address the time and bandwidth issue with Presto, with results which remain to be evaluated, but have pretty much ignored the real problem of cavalierly issuing massive volumes of updates from a large number of third parties, who implement widely varying degrees of QA quality. They simply trust the third parties on their users' behalf, and call it "staying close to upstream". Breakage that trades processor for banwidth is still breakgage.

Reply Parent Score: 2

AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

Please don't presume to answer for the person I was actually talking to. He was talking about package management, not update policies.

Reply Parent Score: 2

BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

It has nothing to do with speed of updates, so much as the entire rpm system. At the time I switched, Apt had much better dependency tracking, and the Debian repositories kick ass, the system just worked better.

Reply Parent Score: 3

AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

What exactly do you mean by 'better dependency tracking'?

Reply Parent Score: 2

akbar Member since:
2009-11-18

I had to even register to this site,
to give U the offical "rpm-expert"-prize.

I.e. every time there is a story about RH/Fedora,
in OSnews, there is some "expert" to talk about rpm and dependency management.

...when rpm has nothing to do with it.

-> yum yum.. Debian this and apt that...

Since the last time I used Debian was with floppies maybe in 1998??, I don't now write any expert comments about Debian, better leave it to somebody who manages 50+ Debian servers...

Reply Parent Score: 1

unoengborg Member since:
2005-07-06

It has nothing to do with speed of updates, so much as the entire rpm system. At the time I switched, Apt had much better dependency tracking, and the Debian repositories kick ass, the system just worked better.



In my experience, there is nothing wrong with dependency tracking in rpm. If you use malformed packages or repos with incompatible dependencies things go wrong but that would happen in the deb world as well. To most people this is a no issue if you stick with well known reposositories, and that is the case regardless if you use yum or apt.


A much bigger problem that we have two dominant non compatible packaging systems. This means that developer effort to package a certain package doubles. This means that the developer is likely to have less time available to test that his package works well on the target system.

It also means that the developer needs time to learn both systems. In the end this means that many programs only gets packaged for one of the packaging systems, resulting in less available software for the end user, and a lesser customer base for the software manufacturer.

Lesser customer base often means less profit. Less profit means that it is less likely that the package gets ported to Linux in the first place, and again the loser is the Linux end user.

Today you need to be able to install rpm to support Linux Standards Base. Debian complies with this by using Alien. However Alien is far too difficult to use to most end users, so if you are software house you still need to create both debian and rpms to support both Red Hat and Debian. In my opinion Debian does the Linux world a disservice in not adopting the standard packaging format.

If Debian switched to rpm as packagin format, their repositories would still kick ass, as they are done by very brilliant people, and they could still use apt-get and other tools that their users know and like, but the job for developers that would like to support both Debian and Red Hat would be much easier.

In the end that would result in a better business proposition for people considering porting their apps to Linux, and in the end this would be a good thing for the Linux user in general, regardless if he use Debian or some Red Hat based distro.

Reply Parent Score: 2