Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:
All that is utter BS. Locating packages is not even required, you just have to run up2date foo and it upgrades foo and ALL its dependencies bar and baz. Corruption of RPM database is yet to happen to me, and I'd blame poor sysadmining for it. And I am yet to see broken RPM dependencies within Redhat shipped packages.
Redhat is certainly not responsible for the two-bit packagers distributing
badly packaged software.
How exactly is debian better? If I distribute fubar.deb without its
dependency baz.deb, debian will also refuse to install it.
Debian may not be the most bleeding edge (at least if you go for "stable"), but:
- there's a really good response time for patching security problems.
- apt/dselect make management simple.
- I like the /etc/init.d scripts for all major services rather than dealing with rc.local type stuff.
- a lot of very committed packagers, and people who are willing to be helpful.
- apt upgrade (ok, that may be redundant).
- it's a distro of idealists. This can be a plus or a minus, depending on your viewpoint. Either way, the Debian people are passionate about doing things according to a plan.
I know many people who use Debain for its breeze of upgradations...aka aptitude _only_.
Regards, Yash
There might be other (perfectly valid) reasons to install Debian on production servers, but the one you are giving is just FUD in my opinion.
There is no compiled lib for Redhat , even tried rpm of Mandrake distribution...that give me another set of dependencies.
Redhat doesn't ship with ntop - so what. It probably has its own reasons. Debian also doesn't ship with a whole lot of stuff.
Binand
_______________________________________________ ilugd mailinglist -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
