Hi, (en FR en-dessous)
My suggestion is a little crazy ...
With the new departure of this distro, perhaps is it a good idea to
invent a sort of "unified managment" of DEV / RPM.
We start on urpmi, and add to urpmi the abilities to encapsulate apt-get ?
So just easy play " urpmi http://www.skype.com/download/skype.deb"; ;-)
It's auto-manage dependencies and finaly, urpmi launch "apt-get install".
Is it technicaly possible ?
--
Bonjour (in EN up)
Ma suggestion suivante va paraître débile, mais ...
En créant une nouvelle distribution, ce serait peut-être une bonne idée
d'inventer _enfin_ une sorte de "gestion unifiée" des paquetages deb et rpm.
L'idée est d'encapsuler apt-get dans urpmi.
Ainsi, on lance juste urpmi "URL/téléchargement/fichier.deb" et ça gère
tout seul les dépendances.
Est-ce techniquement possible ?
Le 26/09/2010 23:55, Carlos Daniel Ruvalcaba Valenzuela a écrit :
I personally found no practical advantage of using apt-get vs urpmi,
while apt has many nice features urpmi is also solid and works
perfectly in most common cases, the only problem you may have is with
malformed packages or with erroneous dependency information, in which
case the only advantage of apt-get is the fact that Debian takes a lot
of care of having correct and working packages, which most RPM based
distros does too (you may get problems with 3th party repos but that
is another problem).
Being a Mandriva fork we would logically stick with it's tools and
packaging system.
Regards,
Carlos Daniel Ruvalcaba Valenzuela
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Kristoffer Grundström
<[email protected]> wrote:
Why not create a new format with the best of both worlds (if possible)?
.mageia ?
Hoyt Duff skrev 2010-09-26 19:44:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 7:13 AM, RAVI KUMAR BALASUBRAMANIAM
<[email protected]> wrote:
only thing i hate about mandriva is its rpm based packages
i prefer apt and deb personally
I can understand a personal preference, but why do you believe that
deb is superior to rpm? Given that Mandriva is already rpm-based, what
benefit could be derived from abandoning the existing build system and
urpmi?
> From everything I have read, neither system has a clear advantage over
the other, and the end result of using either is essentially the same.
I don't believe that changing to a deb-based system would provide any
significant benefit to justify the expense in terms of re-training
devs and creating a new build system.
