> Why are we trying to look ourselves up to Debian? > The world of Linux, Debian has been almost completely marginalized, namely > in favor of SuSE which provides nothing more than eye candy, and RedHat > dominating Linux's share of the corporate market. Nobody even considered > Debian until recently, when it took a reorg and the creation of Ubuntu distro > to bring the zombie Debian project back to life.
Maybe you should reread your sources. Ubuntu is based on Debian, but has zip to do with the procject itself, except that Ubuntu (or rather, Canonical) employs a couple of Debian developers. Debian hasn't reorganised at all, that's still a work in progress (and that's more procedure wise than anything else). > The concept of `apt-get` has been quite well assimilated into Solaris, and > what's more, it leveraged the infrastructure that was already in Solaris to > achieve what Debian had to develop from scratch. Which is, *cough*bullshit*cough*. I don't know, but I haven't seen "apt-get" in solaris, and if you mean "pkg-get" it looks like the cheap ripoff it is (no offence to the people who made it). The fact it "utilizes" the infrastructure already in Solaris is nothing new, maybe you should have a look what APT *really* is (a frontend to the "existing DPKG infrastructure"). And I mean a look which stretches a bit further than just "apt-get". And while you're at it, have a look at dpkg too, together with the developer tools to create packages for it. > What else does Debian have, besides a SW repository which won't run on > Solaris, that Solaris could benefit from? Developers, procedures, policies, quality control. Oh, [one of] the biggest repository of packaged software with quality control in place. Oh yeah, and it supports 11 architectures. May I suggest you stop posting about subjects you're very misinformed over? This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
