deb/apt vs rpm/yum - was Re: preferred linux distro for workstation usage?
Ben Eisenbraun
bene-Gk2boCrsRs1AfugRpC6u6w at public.gmane.org
Mon Sep 13 17:03:30 EDT 2010
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 02:12:55PM -0400, Ryan Pugatch wrote:
> This is another thing I've been thinking of (and a huge reason to choose
> Fedora vs Ubuntu). Personally, I have had my fair share of problems
> with deb/apt and prefer rpm/yum. But I'd love to see a solid pro/con
> list between the two because I don't have any reason to back that up
> aside from personal preference and past experience.
The huge win for deb/APT in my eyes is the option to upgrade from release
to release without reinstalling.
I have done this using Yum on Fedora, but it's not a straightforward
process the way it is on Debian/Ubuntu. The twice yearly reinstallation of
Fedora is a bit tiresome.
Debian's package maintainers do base some of their policies on their
particular dogma, but the Fedora maintainers do the same. They just have a
different set of dogmas. I like Ubuntu because 'aptitude install
flashplugin-installer' just works. Same for Sun Java.
Red Hat/CentOS is a lovely server distribution, but has rather stale
packages for a desktop machine. I suppose Red Hat 6 will solve this for a
while. It has some of the same problems with proprietary software though.
My two cents, etc.
-ben
--
there is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the
proportion. <francis bacon>
More information about the Discuss
mailing list