[linux-elitists] Comprehensive list of Linux malware
Thu Dec 9 22:55:49 PST 2004
Jim Thompson wrote:
> On Dec 9, 2004, at 4:46 PM, Mike MacCana wrote:
>>>> The technical advantages of rpm and deb over each other are minute.
>>>> Most of what people like about one over the other is policy and
>>>> tools that use them.
>> The fact that you can substitute words in my sentence doesn't prove
>> your point.
> Just that its nearly the same argument, and what we're really
> witnessing here is "baby duck syndrome". The editor wars never prove
> a point, either.
I'm not indulging in a packaging war - I'm actually saying they're
unnecessary, as they're pretty much the same.
Vi and Emacs are sufficiently different from a design point of view (vi
is a small editor that can be something you put into a larger program,
emacs is the larger program consisting of many parts). RPM and Deb are not.
>> Of course, there'd be people who hate RPM anyway, cause of what the R
>> once stood for, and the fact they used an ancient version of it with
>> no dependency resolution tools and had a negative experience.
> Well, that was my experience.
Indeed, its a common one.
> More recently I tried FC2 on an old laptop, and it crawled. up2date
> crawled too. Bleaah. (And with Brian Chee living just over the hill,
> its a little embarrassing to show up to the LUAU/HOSEF meetings and
> have to rag on FCn.)
> Debian's apt has served me well. I've got machines in colo that run
> apt-cron and they stay nice and up-to-date (pun intended) with very
True - up2date is slower than apt - OTOH it had some nifty features,
like the ability to use a directory full of packages as a source,
without having to create indexes). But that's besides the point.
Apt-get, up2date, yum etc aren't rpm and deb. They're so similar well
designed tools like apt can abstract them.
> however Debian sucks on a couple other fronts. In particular, its
> nearly impossible to make redboot build on it, because some lamer
> decided to put
> TCL where s/he wanted to, rather than someplace ... special.
Again, that's not a packaging system thing - highlighting my point from
earlier that most people's complains are policies and tools that sit on
top of the particular packaging system.
Debian is standards compliant - if it wasn't in the FHS annointed
location, you should be able to file a bug against that package.
More information about the linux-elitists