Am 30. Jun, 2001 schwäzte Sean 'Shaleh' Perry so: > RPM is not inherently bad. RH (and others) simply do not have a common > standards set that must be followed like Debian does. There are a few > places where each format (rpm and deb) surpass the other. However most of
Anyone want to summarise those or point to a summary? I'll be teaching Debian package management at work[1] next week and I'll probably be asked why .debs are better than .rpms. > the perceived differences are actually in the _use_ of the system and not Yes, the RPM package management tools have always really, really sucked. Finally, Mandrake, SuSE and RedHat have update tools. Those for Mandrake and SuSE don't require paid subscription as RedHat's system does. They all have a lot to learn from Debian :). There's also RedCarpet from Ximian, but no need for 250+ MB of GUI stuff on my servers :). ciao, der.hans [1] Pure Debian on the Linux front :). -- # [EMAIL PROTECTED] home.pages.de/~lufthans/ www.DevelopOnline.com # Practice socially consious hedonism. Do whatever you want, # as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. - der.hans
