Re: [ilugd] deb vs. rpm

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 23:12:06 +0530, Mahesh T Pai said: 

> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> writes:

>> 2) Package relationships: The .deb format has a more nuanced set of
>> relationships, incorporating recommendations and suggested
>> packages, and orders packages by priority as well as group.

> Well, these relationships are defined by the individual(s) who
> create the package(s). How does the package format help here?

You can't define relationship types if the package format does
 not allow them.  For example, if I wanted to say that this package
 depends on the other package in the winter months, I can't do that in
 the debian control file :)

>> 4) Debian packages may run binaries at install and un-install
>>times. I am not sure if this is a major plus.

> Did you mean scripts?

Yup. Since maintainer scripts have to live in the spec file,
 they must be scripts -- for Debian, since they are in external files,
 you can sneak in binary maintainer scripts -- you would violate
 Debian policy, but the .deb format allows that.

>> 5) Package verification and triggers -- rpm has them, and package
>> verification is one of the major features missing in a .deb.
>> triggers, well, there is a technical proposal currently being
>> debated about adding triggers to dpkg, but obviously, Debian is
>> playing catch-up here.

> What about debsums? I remember seeing a discussion about this is
> some recent (previous 2 weeks) in some mailing list.

debsums are not mandatory in Debian, so some packages do not
 have them. Sure, you can attach debsums to apt hooks, but then that
 does not work dor a dpkg -i foo.deb.

Ideally, it should be in dpkg, so that after the postinst is
 run, with debconf and all, hashes of configuration files in /etc are
 calculated. This might happen now we are talking about dpkg triggers.
 debsums does not handle modified configuration files.

> That said, does this mail have anything to do with ESR's desertion
> of RH/Fedora ? (grin)

No, except I feel sorry for Ubuntu.

manoj
-- 
Govern a great nation as you would cook a small fish.  Don't overdo
it. Lao Tsu
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


___
ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi 
http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/

[ilugd] deb vs. rpm

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi,

It might be instructive to compare package file formats on a
 purely technical level: http://kitenet.net/~joey/pkg-comp/
 This is a fairly authoritative document, and well worth understanding.

Here follows commentary on the major points of difference oj
 just the rpm and deb format (please read the URL for details
 regarding other package formats).

 1) Data unpack-able by standard tools, meta-data accessible by
standard tools, and ability to create a .deb with standard (non
distribution specific) tools: .debs are just ar archives of
tar-balls, and can be unpackaged, inspected, and created using cp,
chmod, ar and tar.  rpm's need a special tool.  Now, why is this
important at all?  Well, think of a classified environment, where
you do not want to rely on the packaged tool to help you with
forensics; but you have a trusted solaris box.

 2) Package relationships: The .deb format has a more nuanced set of
relationships, incorporating recommendations and suggested
packages, and orders packages by priority as well as group.

rpm does not have the nuanced relationship, nor priority, but it
does have file based dependencies, and easily extract-able
copyright information so it is easier to marshal packages by
copyright info.

Personally, I am of the opinion that file dependencies are a mixed
bag; they complicate the package dependency graph with edges that
are different from a package dependency; added to the less
nuanced dependency and priority information, they make the
installation ordering of rpm's far less sophisticated.

dpkg goes through a song and dance ordering packages with
topological sorting of the graph, breaking installation into
chunks to ensure that no conflicting packages ever are unpacked at
the same time, unpacking and configuring packages in dependency
order, and rolling back failed installation. rpm does
installations on a best effort basis, and thus failures at
critical stages leave the system in an untenable state.

 3) rpm can mark documentation files (makes it easier to find docs),
and has ghost files, files which are not shipped in the package
but are registered as being owned by the package.   For
documentation, Debian relies on convention; all package
documentation is found in /usr/share/doc/$package; but ghost files
are clearly a plus for rpms.

 4) Debian packages may run binaries at install and un-install times.
I am not sure if this is a major plus.

 5) Package verification and triggers -- rpm has them, and package
verification is one of the major features missing in a .deb.
triggers, well, there is a technical proposal currently being
debated about adding triggers to dpkg, but obviously, Debian is
playing catch-up here.

 6) New sections in the package format: .debs were designed to be
extensible, and whole new sections can be added to the package by
adding yet another tar-ball or the ar archive.  Some of the future
additions being planned are detached signatures by various keys;
developers key, build daemon maintainer key, archive maintainers
key, release manager key, mirror master key, -- in a new section
of the package file.  So, new data sections, compiled binaries
for more than one sub-arch, or 32 and 64 bit binaries -- they can
be added easily to a new section, and dpkg be told how to deal
with the new sections by inspecting the .deb format version.

rpm's can't as easily cope with unseen new requirements.

manoj

-- 
You will have a long and boring life.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


___
ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi 
http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/

Re: [ilugd] deb vs. rpm

[Mahesh T. Pai]

Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:

>  2) Package relationships: The .deb format has a more nuanced set of
> relationships, incorporating recommendations and suggested
> packages, and orders packages by priority as well as group.

Well, these relationships are defined by the individual(s) who create
the package(s). How does the package format help here?

>  4) Debian packages may run binaries at install and un-install times.
> I am not sure if this is a major plus.

Did you mean scripts? 

>  5) Package verification and triggers -- rpm has them, and package
> verification is one of the major features missing in a .deb.
> triggers, well, there is a technical proposal currently being
> debated about adding triggers to dpkg, but obviously, Debian is
> playing catch-up here.

What about debsums? I remember seeing a discussion about this is some
recent (previous 2 weeks) in some mailing list.

That said, does this mail have anything to do with ESR's desertion of
RH/Fedora ? (grin)

-- 
 Mahesh T. Pai <<>> http://paivakil.blogspot.com/
Learn from the mistakes of others.
You won't live long enough to make all of them yourself.


___
ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi 
http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/

[ilugd] [Annoncement] Ubuntu-India at Carte Blanche 2007

[Parthan]

Hello LUGies,

Its our great pleasure in announcing that Ubuntu-India Team will 
participate in Carte Blanche 2007 held at MIT Campus Chrompet on 3rd and 
4th March 2007. We have got a stall for Ubtunu-India Team and have 
prepared banners and fliers about Ubuntu & the Loco Team.

We also plan to exhibit Ubuntu loaded computers as a hands-on system 
where visitors can have an Ubuntu experience. We also plan to display 3D 
desktop using Beryl.

We hereby call for participation from all Ubunteros and Ubuntu fans, 
join our volunteers and help them display the power of the Ubuntu 
community and our favorite distribution.

The stall will also serve the purpose of offering help and troubleshoot 
any of your Ubuntu related queries and assist you to enjoy the Ubuntu 
Linux experience.

We will also try to make Ubuntu 6.10 Edgy CDs available for copies. We 
request those who are interested to get copies to bring Blank CDs (one 
CD per Ubuntu/Kubuntu) and get them burnt in the stall.

We also thank the Carte Blanche Organizers for offering us a stall and 
hope we will get support from the community for Ubuntu-India Teams' 
endeavor on participating in a FOSS event like Carte Blanche.

Thanks to the Ubuntu-India Team for all their support and contributions. 
We look forward to your continued support in all our further endeavors.

For all further assistance and information regarding the Ubuntu-India 
stall please contact any of the following Ubunteros:

[1] Baishampatan Ghose - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Ubuntu-India Loco Team Lead
(Local Team Members at Chennai)
[2] Aanjhan Ranganathan - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** NA during the event
[3] Parthan S R - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** NA during the event
[4] Sudharshan - [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 9840904288 ** Will be incharge of 
the stall during the event, along with other volunteers

[ We welcome the other volunteers for the Ubuntu-In stall to provide 
their contact details by updating this thread]

All comments and suggestions are welcome from the community to make this 
event a grand success.

Some Relayed Links:

[1] Carte Blanche'07 - http://cs-mit.org/cb07/schedule.html
[2] Ubuntu India Team Home/Wiki - http://ubuntu-in.org/wiki/Main_Page
[3] Ubuntu India Loco Team - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IndianTeam
[4] Ubuntu.com -   http://www.ubuntu.com/

-- 
With Regards

Parthan (TechnoFreak)

.   A Proud GNU/Linux User and Ubuntero
.0.
..0 [Web] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Parthan
000 [Blog]http://technofreakatchennai.wordpress.com

___
ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi 
http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/