Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 11:50:14AM +0100, Jaroslaw Zachwieja wrote:Main difference (IMHO, from what I've seen):
On ??ro 23. lipca 2003 11:39, Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 08:22:48AM +0100, Jaroslaw Zachwieja wrote:
On ?ro 23. lipca 2003 03:34, Olivier Thauvin wrote:
But lot of things are actually missing in RH:
urpmi
Cmon, RH makes money on up2date - they have a real package management
system, just want you to pay money for it. Apt-get still a pile of
--force --nodeps poo.
apt-get is production quality for redhat. But not for Mandrake.
Probably due to errors in the dependencies.
You call broken updates, upgrades, conflicts, unintentional rollbacks and coredumps a "production quality"??? Maybe in RH terms :))))
I have not experienced that. Anyway I would be interested in hearing about your experiences, and suggested ways forward. They say that apt-get works swell on debian, so distributions like redhat and mandrake should be able to do it too. And mandrakeupdate/urpmi and up2date do the job - where is the difference?
* urpmi is a cash generator. You need to pay (or tollerate being
nagged every 60 days) to use it;
that should have been up2date, not urpmi.
flame me!!!
regards,
Stefan
PS: Mom told me to get 7-8 hours of sleep a day, why don't I just stick to it??
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
