alan c wrote:
> I have heard several independent generally adverse remarks about RPM,
> and would be grateful to know some background.
>
> I use/d suse ok, which I know uses rpms, and now k/ubuntu, which I
> know is deb based. Comments even go as far as
> 'RPM hell' - what does rpm do that is unwanted?
In the bad old days of just using the rpm command, there would be times
when you installed or removed an RPM package and it would fail saying
other packages require/depend on the RPM. It could become RPM-hell if
you didn't understand who to get around this. Since then the RPM command
has had many improvements to help around this with new command line
argument. The biggest change was moving to yum, which like apt, sorts
out all the dependencies for you. It still requires good package
management to list the dependencies, but the same applies in apt. I
haven't had any problems with yum or pup in Fedora and Red Hat (RHEL).
The ones you hear complaining suffered RPM-hell many years ago and moved
to non-RPM systems. It really isn't a problem anymore.
John.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Discover Linux - Open Source Solutions to Business and Schools
http://discoverlinux.co.uk
--------------------------------------------------------------
