hello ...
just some added comments here ... might be somewhat off topic, but worth a point.
On Thu, Apr 13, 2000 at 06:20:03PM +0100, Stephen Turner wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, David Brownlee wrote:
> >
> > In what way does redhat lose with package integration? The main
> > ways I could see would be the frightening lossage that ensues when
> > you have two packages which each depend on a different version
> > of a common package (not likely to be a problem with analog), and
> > mismatched shared libraries between the package and the base
> > system (again, not something I'd expect with analog).
> >
>
> Well, I haven't used RedHat. But as I understand it
>
> (1) RedHat relies on an unknown user to get the dependencies right. Debian
> only lets official developers do it.
What I really don't like with the rpm's, is that there is no way to determine if the
rpm was made by someone with
programming talent or a ten year old kid. Thus, what does one do if it's a trojan or
if it screws up your system
totally.
Sadly, Red Hat doesn't make any effort to maintain some type of control over this ...
it's use at own risk.
> (2) Because all packages are part of the distribution, they are all covered
> in the bug tracking database. And if a package has a serious enough bug and
> is not fixed, it can eventually get forceably taken over, or pulled. RedHat
> leaves it lying around until someone provides a replacement.
>
> (3) Packages occasionally conflict in unexpected ways. Because everything is
> in the distribution in Debian, this can be reported and fixed.
This is how the ports/pkg's in *BSD work as well. Each port has a maintainer, so if
something does screw up and can
moan to someone. Example:
Port: analog-4.04
Path: /usr/ports/www/analog
Info: An extremely fast program for analysing WWW logfiles
Maint: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: www
B-deps:
R-deps:
*sigh* it hasn't yet been updated to 4.1 :P
>
> (4) Debian has more available dependencies: Apart from Depends and
> Conflicts, it has Recommends, Suggests, Replaces, Provides and Pre-Depends.
> This seems to make for much smoother installation.
What is also nice with the *BSD ports (hmm, can't say this exactly for NetBSD, but for
FreeBSD and for OpenBSD for
sure) that if you don't have a certain dependency, the Makefile will get it and
install it, then it will return
back to the build of whatever. Sadly, the rpm's just give you a vague message.
However, it's worth noting ... that analog installs very nicely on a *BSD system
without the ports, the ports just
make life easier.
the .deb packages sound quite good ... it sounds like they work like the ports! :-)
tim
--
Buy yourself a computer ... buy yourself frustration
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the analog-help mailing list. To unsubscribe from this
mailing list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe" in the main BODY OF THE MESSAGE.
List archived at http://www.mail-archive.com/analog-help@lists.isite.net/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
