Here here, and let's be honest, how common are deb packages vs. RPM's (when both statically and dynamically linked types are included)?? You don't see a site called deb find do you? There needs to be some sort of standard, even within the Linux community, otherwise we are all banging our heads against the wall trying to prove our way is superior. Like it or loath it, RPM is here to stay and is fast becoming the defacto standard way for programs to be released for desktop oriented distributions (which Mandrake most certainly is). Sorry, I personally like the direction Mandrake is headed and would hate to see it change.
The only complaint I have is the whole statically linked vs. dynamically linked RPM debate. And before the list tries to tell me why dynamically linked is better, save it, I know all the reasons. BUT, I would so like to see all the main distros's that use RPM packages (and app. developers for that matter) release both statically linked and dynamically linked versions of their software. This method could be used at least for packages that are not installed with a minimal Mdk install. Those of us that don't want a perfectly lean mean machine and could care less about saving harddrive space (how cheap are harddrives these days??) or RAM on running apps but prefer packages that install without worrying about dependency crap would love to install the statically linked RPM's. 2 steps, download and install. Simple. In my opinion, this is the single biggest factor that is slowing Linux uptake on the desktop. Momma bear can even install statically linked RPM's. Before the list flames me and says I don't know what I'm talking about, trust me, I do. I know computers and can happily solve dependency problems all day but why praytell MUST I if I don't want to?? How difficult is it really to release 2 versions of an RPM?? Now that would offer Mandrake users REAL choice. Just my .02c worth. Regards, Jason Greenwood Jason Straight wrote: > Timothy R. Butler wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> I just had a kind of "waaay out there" idea I thought I would toss >> on here. Mandrake's urpmi mimicks the concept of apt-get, the menu >> system driving Mandrake is Debian's, and many other things are done >> in a Debianish way. So my thought is this, what about making >> Mandrake 9.0 or something like that Debian-based? Here are the >> benefits as I see them: >> >> 1.) While RPM is great, dpkg seems to offer some really wonderful >> features. It's also a lot easier to make packages, and simple to >> convert them (I guess you could alias the command rpm to "alien >> --to-deb," actually). >> >> 2.) Urpmi too is very nice, but a Mandrake Debian setup would have >> a major benefit - apt-get could be configured first to get Mandrake >> packages, and if one didn't exist for a particular program, it could >> revert "woody" or "sid" packages. >> > Except that urpmi works. Apt-get was nothing but a pain in my ass when > I used debian, it died continuously, I had everyone trying to figure > out why short of Ian himself, and no one could figure it out. I got a > lot of "it works for me", but it didn't for me. > > > > >> >> >> 3.) Mandrake could be the first to offer offer an i586-optimized >> Debian-based distro. >> > It would be nice to have a debian based distro with mdk's taste of > packages, but I don't want mdk to change to apt-get. > >> >> >> 4.) This would further distinguish MDK from the "others" (RedHat >> and SuSE). >> > If distinguishing mdk to be different than others were the goal why be > linux at all? > >> >> >> 5.) Finally, since Mandrake uses Debian-like ideas, and even uses >> the Debian menu system, I would think it would be simple (relatively >> speaking) to make such a move. >> >> I know it seems like this is a space that is already take with >> Libranet and soon Xandros, but it seems to me the low-level Debian >> utilities combined with the excellent interface of Mandrake could be >> truly a "killer app." >> >> Any thoughts? >> >> -Tim >> >> > I agree to some extent, but I personally have had bad interactions > with the "debian userbase" in ircland and other areas. Debian users as > a majority are the most annoying linux users in the world who do > nothing but complain about Redhat and Mandrake, they say this or that > about it, but when you call their bluff and ask them to show you why > it sucks they can't. > > So after all the bitching about Debian this or Slackware that I tried > both of them, I liked the simple straight forward installs on both > ok, slackware was fine. Debian was ok, fast install but the apps were > older than Jesus, and updating with apt-get to testing or unstable > broke the system, and apt itself would die 4-6 times during the > updates. Got real old after about 10 installs on Debian. I seeked help > on IRC to make sure I was doing it all right and all the Debianholes > and Slacksuckers who said their distro's were so superior to Mandrake > couldn't explain why Debian was sucking. Slackware was ok, but I > wouldn't say superior. Why can't mandrake just be mandrake? > > It rocks just the way it is - why debianize it? > >
