Crawford Rainwater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Matt> On the RPM side, we aren't testing an equivalent to > Matt> apt-get. Should we add in yum (or something else)? > > No.
Crawford -- I agree with all your other analysis, but I think you meant "Yes" here based on ... > Reasons for the above are simple. apt-* (apt-get, aptitude, etc.) > and yum are higher level tools built on lower level tools. apt-* > from dpkg and yum from rpm. So you *ARE* saying we should have YUM if we're testing APT. Right now it seems we are testing APT and RPM, not DPKG or YUM. ;) > emerge/portage is the similar in being a higher > level utility versus the "make process" (which I hope most on > this list know what I am talking about; especially the Gentoo > sadists like myself ;-) ). Again, I should have stated "rpmbuild ~ source" prior. But since ebulid does binary installs, it does fit ~ DPKG ~ RPM. As far as "Gentoo sadists," I run Gentoo as well for developer environments. Leading edge development on Fedora is too far behind (and anyone who develops on RHEL doesn't realize the mistake they are making -- RHEL is for sustainment-cycle development). Gentoo is ideal in comparison. I was happy when Daniel decided to finally do a "BSD ports-like" Linux distro, and then he did it on steroids. I love Portage and wish even package-based distros would use it to build select "software stacks" atop of their package-based cores. E.g., Perl/CPAN, Python, Apache/Mods, Java, etc... -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://thebs413.blogspot.com -------------------------------------------------- Fission Power: An Inconvenient Solution _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
