of course debian works better

Story: Ubuntu in abundanceTotal Replies: 5
Author Content

Jun 03, 2006
9:39 AM EDT
Because its packaging system is mature, well-tested, and superior to all the others. It's more than just having aptitude and apt-get, it's a complete system- the official package repositories are high-quality, and that's what makes it all work so well.

The RPM world has long been plagued by three things:

- no quality control. Any baby coder could release junky RPMs upon the world, with the result that thousands of RPMs are buggy and flawed - no dependency-resolver like apt-get. we all know and love RPM hell - insane levels of patching and needless customizations by Red Hat.

The first two issues are well on their way to being solved. It looks like Yum has become the standard dependency-resolving installer, despite its flaws, but it's just a baby and will doubtless continue to improve. Red Hat and Fedora both have official core repositories, and RPMForge.net shows promise as a comprehensive, good-quality third-party repository.

The last one I fear is chronic. Administering Red Hat systems drives me batty. They're perfectly stable and perform well, but it gets wearisome navigating their maze of circularly-dependent configuration scripts, which are needlessly over-complex, and you have to be very careful what you install because they customize kernels and applications and pretty much everything so derned much. You can't even do source installs without crossing your fingers, because you never know when you're going to be foiled by some weirdo Red Hatted library or gcc customization.

I've thrown everything in the world into my Debian systems, and they just keep chugging along.

Jun 03, 2006
9:42 AM EDT
> I've thrown everything in the world into my Debian systems, and they just keep chugging along.

Yep, same here.

Jun 03, 2006
10:14 PM EDT

Why is it that everytime people talk about rpm vs deb they ALWAYS say "there's no equivalent to synaptic in RPM land"?

URPMI - from the distro formerly known as Mandrake. I was using that to install apps + deps long before Ubuntu was even a twinkle in it's Daddy's eye.


Jun 03, 2006
10:31 PM EDT
With the greatest respect tuxchick2, that is not correct.

One does not allow any old rpms to be installed. If you do, you may as well install those virii and trojans while you're at it. The dangers are identical. There are quality repositories around. Use them? No problem.

There are several dependancy resolvers like apt-get. Including apt-get. :-) I've been using apt-get on Fedora systems for years I guess, dunno how long exactly. Have recently (year or so?) switched to using yum instead on my fedora systems. With SuSE, all that dependancy tracking is handled thru YAST. I honestly haven't had dependancy hell for a long time. Even when I did it wasn't that hard to resolve. rpmfind being the usual method.

RedHat can patch all it likes, doesn't impact my non-redhat rpm based systems. :-)

I'll disagree with the over-complex assertion. I actually find the methods used quite clear and refreshing. There are a number of places to place .. more specific configuration. eg /etc/sysconfig/...

Perhaps it's a target audience thing? I'm used to administering Solaris systems, so RedHat's method is much more pleasant and polished than the very bare bones style in Solaris (pre 10 that is...). The flip side for me, personally, when I have trialled using Debian as a server system, I quickly ran away screaming. It felt like I had warped back to my first ever slackware install in '95. ;-)

Jun 03, 2006
10:47 PM EDT
nb; Before I get mugged by the pedantic brigade...

urpmi is comparable to apt-get, not synaptic


Jun 04, 2006
12:52 AM EDT
Used um both stevem, and urpim is similar to, but 'not' the equal of apt-get.

Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]

Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!