On 11/7/07, Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 12:07:48PM +0100, Antonio de la Rosa wrote: > > > > > Well, RPM distros are not Arch. You don't have real update in a year, > > for example. You have security updates. Do you can update Fedora > > versions with yum?. Centos for example, no. I don't know if fedora can > > be updated to another version now... > > You can update Fedora with yum--it's not recommended--I think their wiki > starts with our advice, don't do it. Then they say, if you must, this > could work. I've done it without issue, but wouldn't do it on our > CentOS servers. > > Fedora itself is also considered cutting edge, it's more or less the > testing ground for the RH commercial products.
Yes, but it much stable than Arch, and have most resent software. And you should update fedora using cd/dvd with anaconda instead of yum, yes. > > 6) Fedora is not enterprise and there is no rpm-hell since fedora used > > > yum. yum+rpm even more simple to manage packages than pacman. And it's > > > FASTER than pacman! > > > > > ??????. Make rpm's packages is horrible. Dependencies is based in > > libraries detected. In Arch you have many support for make your > > packages, for fedora if you need a version for a package that is not in > > official repositories...., well, you have to go to rpmfind and > > search...., if don't exists or is for use in another distro rpm based, > > you need create the package. Well, you need download dev rpms now. Well, > > then you can't compile the package why the version of a dependency is > > not that you need... > > It's far better than it was several years ago, however, if you mix > repositories, you can get into trouble. You can add the yum > ignore-broken rpm (or something like that) and still find that it will > stop a 30 package upgrade because of one failed dependency, then, you > have to do it again with --exclude broken_package. As for speed, I > certainly haven't found it faster than pacman. I haven't done a > comparison (almost impossible for me, as Fedora will install so many > more packages by default, and it's a bit difficult to get a stripped > down functioning version) but subjectively, it certainly doesn't seem > faster than pacman. > heh! man, read about yum-priorities plugin if you want to mix 3-d party repo. Also, wiki starts from "don't mix 3-rd party repos, unless you're clear know what you do" Read about "spins" if you want to create stripped down version. Any way, fedora it's _just_an_example_. I'm talking about arch-way, which doesn't mean "unusable", it even doesn't mean "unstable". It mean "simple"! Now if you have arch-desktop you should rebuild broken community/extra dependencies themselves. It's not "simple" - it's ugly. If i want to build 50% of distro by hands i can choose gentoo.
_______________________________________________ arch mailing list arch@archlinux.org http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
