> I started using mandrake about a week ago. Before > mandrake I used conectiva. Although I have a little > experience with urpm I think it is better than apt.
>From my limited experience I've had better success with rpmfind, actually, especially rpmfind -newer. But I am thinking that the (recent) apt-get I have tried - probably a few months old, isn't the problem (and incidentally urpmi as well) is that the configuration files are no longer of any use. Supposedly there are quite a number of mandrake mirrors (esp for cooker) and when I try and apt-get something most of the time it tries all the possible ftp sites and just dies without being able to get anything. At least in that re- spect urpmi fares better. But urpmi has also greedily ate all RAM and swap in my machine (256 megs and about 700 megs of swap). apt-get is (supposedly) one of debian's most touted benefits, and from what others tell me you don't run into the problems in connecting and not having to rerun the same command 10 times in a row :( - so I'm hoping that the debian mirror sites are maybe just better or that detail is just omitted by debian advocates :). > file. Another thing. Let's say you have an apache rpm > package at you home directory. With apt you can't > execute "apt-get install apache" because apt will look For small things without too many dependencies apt-get works pretty well. I wouldn't try a dist-upgrade or a major uprade of something with a lot of dependencies. Supposedly also this is one area where apt-get (or debian proper) is better than rpm. But surprisingly, rpmfind (when I used it on Redhat) worked well, unless there were some strange dependencies or something. > Gustavo
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
