Re: to RPM or not?
From: nahpets (NOSPAM_at_northpole.com)
Date: 09/13/03
- Next message: Jonathan A.: "Re: Why doesn't "cat" print content of a file to standard output if the content is only a number ?"
- Previous message: \: "Re: The time is right to evangelize Linux..."
- In reply to: Gary G. Taylor: "Re: to RPM or not?"
- Next in thread: Kurt: "Re: to RPM or not?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 00:24:34 -0400
Gary G. Taylor wrote:
> Fao, Sean wrote:
>
>>
>> "Gollum" <gollum@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:pan.2003.09.12.11.14.33.437000@NOSPAM.invalid...
>>> Fao, Sean wrote:
>>>
>>> > I hate RPM's and I am a complete Linux advocate. To me, RPM's are the
>>> > worst thing to ever hit Linux.
>>>
>>> It isn't really the RPM format that's the problem. The .deb format
>>> doesn't offer that much more.
>>>
>>> But the lack of standardisation among RPM-based distros is a problem:
>>> A. They locate files in different directories.
>>> B. They use different package names.
>>> C. Some distros split a package into several subpackages, while
>>> others don't (or use fewer packages).
>>> D. They compile applications against the latest release of the standard
>>> libraries (glibc), so the binary RPMs can't be used on older releases
>>> of the same distro.
>>
>> I personally don't mind installing from source. I'm curisous how Windows
>> gets around the library issues. Do they just assume that if the DLL is
>> newer that it's "better"?
>
> Windows users have been in ".dll hell" since the beginning. The problem is
> that many carless developers modify Windows .dlls to suit themselves,
> rather than creating their own, and have their app install the new .dll
> over the old one. The mods they make often break parts of the .dll that
> other apps want to use. One is then stuck in the same position as one is
> with Linux: change the dll (lib) and break existing software, or leave it
> as it is and give up using the new app.
>
> Linux developers should create their own app-specific libs and NEVER
> tamper with existing libs. Duh.
I was reading the Gentoo Portage docs. They have apparently taken care of
these problems by allowing your system to have multiple versions of the
same package installed in parallel. Which one your software uses depends
on environment variables (the "USE" variable). I didn't delve to far into
it, but in my opinion, the Portage system may be the next step in the
evolution of package management.
Stephan
- Next message: Jonathan A.: "Re: Why doesn't "cat" print content of a file to standard output if the content is only a number ?"
- Previous message: \: "Re: The time is right to evangelize Linux..."
- In reply to: Gary G. Taylor: "Re: to RPM or not?"
- Next in thread: Kurt: "Re: to RPM or not?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
