Re: yum vs apt-get

On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 08:46:02AM -0400, Philippe A. wrote:
I would like to know why was yum choosen to be distributed in fedora instead
of apt-get. I started with apt-get before knowing yum existed and was
actually delivered with my dist. When I gave yum a try, I was disappointed.
Its verrry slooow, and it seems not to be doing much more. I've read from
kde-redhat maintainer apt-get is no longer developped, but other than that,
what are the main differences between the two tools?

"No longer developed" is a pretty strong reason. Howver, the killer feature
is that apt-get was at the time unable to deal with multilib systems (i386
binaries on x86_64). There's actually been some development since then, and
it does have rudimentary support now.

I don't want to start passionnate debate here. I simply want to understand
yum better and the reasons motivating the choice of a tool over another.

Have you looked at the apt-get source code? It's a very complicated
codebase, and the grafting-in of RPM support didn't help that. Yum, on the
other hand, was designed from scratch in very readable Python. This makes it
a lot easier to improve, making it a better base for going forward.

Performance is still a weak point, but with every release that gets better.
Matthew Miller mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx <>
Boston University Linux ------> <>

fedora-list mailing list
To unsubscribe: