On Thu, 18 May 2000, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously Chip Salzenberg wrote: > > Actually, from what I've been told, rpm has at least one serious > > technical flaw: The order of execution for pre-install and > > post-install scripts is nonsensical for upgrades. > > I wouldn't call it nonsensical, but the way dpkg does it is definitely > more robust. I need to take another close look at how rpm and dpkg > differ in this respect anyway, so if people are interested in the little > details I might be willing to write a little comparison about it.. > > Wichert. >
I, for one, would be very interested in this comparison. My company has started using Linux in a pretty big way, kind of at my instigation. Because I was the only Linux guy, we used Debian of course :). But because a lot of my colleagues were new to Linux and found the Debian install to be much less "slick" than Red Hat, I was under attack as to my choice. A lot of what makes Debian cool is appreciated only after some time with it.
