______________________________________________________________ > Od: jackyf.de...@gmail.com > Komu: kc.ubuntu...@centrum.cz > CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, de...@lists.debian.org > Datum: 09.02.2009 18:15 > Předmět: Re: incapable and obsolete APT / Aptitude replacement > kc.ubuntu...@centrum.cz wrote: #> #> If you look at the comparison i posted above, you can se that APT is worse than Urpmi and SMART - which was the best dependency solver in that comparison. Zypper mentioned above, is a ittle bit better #than #smart: #> #> #> #If you look at users' feelings, situation will rotate significantly, due to my #> #experience. #> #> That's completely nonsense. Possitive rating targets the APT-DEB-debian repository complete system. It does not mean, APT it-self is good. It can be worst all-over the world, but usage among single repository #with dependencies tested for years before release can't challenge hard solver work. #That's almost completely not true. Debian release managers and maintainers of #key system packages may tell you how much efforts they put to allow smooth and #painless upgrades of the system.
This is exactly what i want to say. Debian developers do great job and long hard work, and in the end, as a result original Debian repository exist, with so precisely descibed dependencies, that even the most stupid package manager could work well. That is not a challenge for dependecy solver. Solving preblems among the debian repository is easy. This Debian aproach is great for servers, but not usefull for Desktops, where bleeding edge software and mixed repositories could be expected. That the real reason of bigy hype around Ubuntu Linux, which fill the hole for Debian Desktop. And in that case, I feel APT useless. And because Debian and ubuntu are bound together I think it is imposible to make a change only in ubuntu. Although they put some effort and money in SMART. #> As you pointed above, and as I understand it, APT is de-facto simple package-updater. Mixing many repositories or downgrading is treated as a stupid way. Am I right? #Mixing many repos? Not, of course. I see sources.list's with dozen of repos. #Downgrading packages may break your system (by design, in any software). So, #all downgrades should be done with caution and in not-automatic way. That is not the argument. How could APT know, which souliton is the best. As I said above, on Debian Stable, it can be expected that upgrading is the only way. But not on the desktop whith shiny new software. #> OK. Maybe i just supposed APT to do various things I'm used to expect from other package managements. Now i undrstand, reading the point of view of APT ?cotributor?, this piece of software is not for me. #Maybe. But still, there is a qeustion, If I use Debian-like system, which package manager with powerfull solver I can use? Package management is not the only argument for choosing or refusing some distribution. -- Eugene V. Lyubimkin aka JackYF, JID: jackyf.devel(maildog)gmail.com C++/Perl developer, Debian Maintainer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
