On Wed, 7 Nov 2001, Paul Lussier wrote: > What I don't understand is why rpm doesn't do this to begin with.
I have actually given a fair amount of thought to this, and it occurs to me the reason is the nature of the distributions. The mindset behind Debian appears to be that the distribution is an entity of constant change. They provide a large, central repository, organized in various categories, and you are expected to pull down whatever you want or need. Packages are added continuously. This approach has a certain appeal, and does seem to best align with the "bazaar" approach of Open Source. The fact that Debian occasionally releases a CD set is almost incidental. I think this is why Debian has, historically, had trouble getting a "release" out -- their whole structure is not geared towards the "release" mentality. Rather, every Debian system is expected to become an extension of the central Debian package repository. Contrast this with a more "traditional" distribution, like Red Hat. Their mindset is that the distribution is a discrete product, shipped out on CDs when finished. They do not provide a tool to download additional items because *everything available is on the CDs*. The central repository of packages is your CD set. You want to upgrade? Buy or download new CDs. As far as fixes go (what RHS calls "errata"), a glorified FTP client is basically all you need.� APT would be overkill. It is easy to fall into the trap of thinking rpmfind and apt-get are analogous, but they are not. apt-get connects you to the Debian package repository. rpmfind is more of a search engine for RPMs. APT works so well because it is confined to that single distribution -- Debian. rpmfind is designed to find packages that, in the case of Debian, would be found *outside* APT. So, the problem is not with RPM, per se, or even with Red Hat. The problem is that the paradigms of the two approaches are fundamentally different. As for a solution that gives you the best of both worlds, that is left as an exercise for the reader. :-) -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ***************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *****************************************************************
