On Fri 04 Aug 2000, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote: > > I noticed that :-P It's funny, though, how relatively undocumented RPM > really is. Having not used RPM for about two years before my last job, I > couldn't remember anything about it other than 'rpm -i'. Finding more > docs on the real-world operation of RPM was akin to going to the dentist.
I saw someone with a book once. About as thick as the sendmail "bat" book, called "Maximum RPM" I believe. I think that a program that requires a book that thick _must_ suck (yes, I consider sendmail in that category :-) > I know. When apt first came around, I was amazed and it just keeps > getting better. It's sooooo easy to upgrade one package, a few, or an > entire system, all while using the sources that you wish for package > retrieval. Unfortunately, apt-get doesn't cooperate with a number of "transparant" proxies. I've debugged it down to the fact that apt-get over http wants a keep-open connection, and the proxy changes that into a one-connection-per-transfer system. apt-get then barfs with the error "bad http header". Oh well. I worked around it with ssh port forwarding :-) I should sometime document the problem more and submit a bug. > definitely good) and a few other things. The developer tools are also > much better, IMO (I really hate .spec files...is it just me or are they > more difficult to deal with than the debian/ dir stuff?). I have no idea, and no intention of finding out :-) Paul Slootman -- home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.wurtel.demon.nl/ work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.murphy.nl/ debian: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ isdn4linux: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.isdn4linux.de/
