On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 10:43 PM, Arun Tomar <tomar.arun at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi! > > On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 22:10 +0530, Sriram Narayanan wrote: >> Hello list: >> [...]> >> RPM >> RPM seems the most interesting format at the moment because: >> - popular and widely known package format >> - lots of tools (yum, smart, etc) which are RPM aware >> - active maintenance, development and feature additions. >> > RPM is good. Now a days they use LZMA compression so the file size is > small and you could fit in more software in cd or dvd. I heard that > people have been working at redhat so that when updating the existing > software, only new code or diff would be applied and no need to download > the entire package, which seems to be a good idea. > > I hate the different files for different repositories model. why can't you > have > a single file like sources.list in ubuntu/debian for managing repositories.
Are you referring to Spkg ? I wrote it in about 3 months of part time effort in order to fill a temporary gap. It was never intended to be a full-fledged long-term solution - some people (Not you!) try to compare it with IPS and criticize. Still spkg is fairly powerful, feature packed and serves more than the purpose created with the minimum of effort. Yes it is a re-invention of the wheel but a necessary move since we were not ready to change to a new packaging solution at that time. Spkg layers on top of SVR4 packaging but does not solve some of the fundamental flaws of SVR4. The SVR4 specification is very comprehensive and powerful but implementation is horrendous. It would have been interesting to re-implement SVR4 in Python fixing all it's flaws but once again it will be a re-invention of the wheel. >> >> Deb >> - We may explore this too >> - Nexenta have done good work here >> - Debian Community's opposition in the past is a matter of concern. >> ? ? ? ?- Need clarity on their position. >> ? ? ? ?- Need to make time and interact with the Debian community >> > One of the best pkg managers. extremely fast and user friendly. So i > would really suggest to seriously consider deb as package manager. Plus > nexenta has ported good amount of packages, so less re-work to be done. The Deb upstream has been quite unfriendly about deb on osol. A little googling will show that there were no eventual conclusions reached - IANAL. But we need to get a clarification on the current situation. An unfriendly upstream is a problem, like SUN is presently having with an unfriendly Xen upstream not accepting most of SUN's patches. RHEL is a solid platform actually used in a large-scale critical enterprise deployments with RPM providing a robust foundation. Redhat is also adopting Yum. So these are technologies to look out for. I do appreciate Dpkg and the excellent work done by Nexenta but I am mortally afraid of license issues even those that are not real but still percieved by upstream. However once again we need to review the present situation vis-a-vis Deb as it would allow us to collaboratively work with Nexenta. [...]> > > Another point to consider is that in India, people still have limited > access to net. so it would be better if the distro has all the necessary > stuff that is needed and if not then it should be easy to just download > the stuff from the net and install it to the system. Exactly, we are more than aware of this. Even today all packages in BeleniX are compressed insanely using maximum LZMA compression possible via 7Zip. Regards, Moinak. -- ================================ http://www.belenix.org/ http://moinakg.wordpress.com/
