On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 14:15 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 1:29 PM, Ian Chapman
<packages(a)amiga-hardware.com> wrote:
> Arch Willingham wrote:
>
> > I'm not trying to start a battle of which is better…just trying to get
> > an idea of why its seems so popular.
>
> Well something else to throw into the pot along with the other answers,
> on several occasions I've heard Ubuntu fans cite the fact it doesn't use
> rpm (ubuntu uses deb) as one of the main reasons they use it because
> they don't like the "dependency hell" of rpm. Personally I think
that
> view is at best outdated but each to their own. :-)
>
It's a ridiculous view point as in terms of dependencies rpms and debs
are almost equivalent. Both are capable of causing dep problems. The
only major diff that I am aware of is that devs have a concept of soft
deps for optional packages
I use Fedora at home and have done for many years. I installed Kubuntu
for some family members and friends, and have recently installed it on
my office machine where I had also used Fedora for many years. Neither
system is problem-free, but [K]ubuntu tends to have far fewer dependancy
issues. It's also significantly easier to upgrade the distro from one
version to the next.
I note that increasing numbers of third-party packages are easily
available for [K]ubuntu and sometimes not so easily for Fedora. Take a
look at
getmiro.com for a typical example. Which distro do you think is
better supported by the Miro devels?
None of this should be taken as a showstopping argument, just my 2c.
poc