Doesn't packagekit provide Gnome and KDE-native interfaces for package management?
Shawn On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Richard <[email protected]>wrote: > On Tuesday 28 September 2010 23:42:21 Renaud MICHEL wrote: > > No, if you are talking about rpmdrake, you should compare it to synaptic. > > I you want to talk about apt (be it apt-get or aptitude), you should > > compare it to urpmi, and urpmi (in my opinion) is not slow. > > > Agreed. Though I am not by any means a command line junkie I will always > use > uprmi when I know exactly what I want. > > So it is synaptic/apt and rpmdrake/urpmi. No doubt yum has a GUI > counterpart > too. > > > > emerge and macports are source-based "packet" managers. > > As the programs are compiled when you want to install them, you can > decide > > to exclude some optional, compile-time functionality, and avoid their > > dependencies. > > > > In pre-compiled packets (like rpm or deb), the packager decided what > should > > be compiled, and so what are the required dependencies. > > You still have the option to get the source package and tweak it (via the > > spec file for rpm, or rule for deb) to exclude some things you don't > > require. (but you will need to do it again each time an update is > > available) > > > Right, I have done this with a custom ffmpeg build. Compile time dependency > control is, of course, a grace and favour benefit provided by the program > author. I get the impression that a packager can introduce depencies when > special support is needed for extra features he may choose to include. This > seems to be what happened with the 2010.1 issue of the foobillard rpm where > a > new dependency on Pulse has been created which does not exist in the 2010.0 > package or the author's source. > > > > Packages have dependencies, those are interpreted as "this package cannot > > work without those". > > You can also have less strict recommendations, deb has provided for long > > recommended packages (not really required, but a must have) and suggested > > packages (is an interesting addition, but nothing essential). > > Rpm also provide such a mechanism (though I think is younger than deb) > with > > the suggested packages. > > Urpmi take the suggested packages into account, when installing it will > by > > default selected also the suggested packages, but you can add the --no- > > suggests option to avoid this. > Does this mean that I can find the KDE packages which "depend" on Pulse and > re-package them such that Pulse is only "recommended"? If so then I will > have > to find the way to set the --no-suggests option in rpmdrake. I hadn't even > looked for it before as I have only recently started to discover problems > in > Mandriva packages. > > On the urpme side, if you uninstall a package that was installed as a > > suggestion, it won't trigger the uninstallation of the package that > > suggested it. > Something similar seems to apply to packages which I inadvertently "mark" > as > manually installed. urpme reports that such packages will be excluded from > orphan detection. I love the --auto-orphans switch. > > Richard > >
