Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 17:15:07 -0800 (PST) From: "S.Toms" <tomas@primenet.com> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0012021711570.1633-100000@scarydream.smotrs.org> Subject: apt/rpm Anyone take a look at the article on slashdot/freshmeat about a new fork of apt that now supports rpm. Looks very promissing, would love to see this implemented in the next or future versions of SuSE. -- S.Toms - tomas@primenet.com - www.primenet.com/~tomas SuSE Linux v7.0+ - Kernel 2.2.17 %DCL-MEM-BAD, bad memory VMS-F-PDGERS, pudding between the ears
From: Jerry Kreps <jerrykreps@jlkreps.net> Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 20:10:01 -0600 Message-Id: <00120220100101.23751@JLKreps> Subject: Re: [SLE] apt/rpm On Saturday 02 December 2000 19:15, S.Toms wrote:
Anyone take a look at the article on slashdot/freshmeat about a new fork of apt that now supports rpm. Looks very promissing, would love to see this implemented in the next or future versions of SuSE.
<p>I saw it. On the surface it looks ok. But, I've had recent experience that suggests automatic installs may not be a good thing. While attempting to get a certain app to install using an rpm binary, the dependency said I had to install the libfam library first. There was only ONE site on the internet that had that library, sgi. In reading about libfam there was a recommendation to install a kernel patch to make libfam an interrupt instead of a polling app. The kernel patch was the author's FIRST attempt at kernel coding, and his work hadn't been filtered through the kernel team!!! No way I'm going to install that kind of software. An auto-loading rpm app would have. JLK <p> -- Scientific theories, according to Sir Karl Popper, can be "falsified," or proven wrong, by experiment. Unscientific theories -Marxist dialectical history and Freudian psychology were Popper's favorites- are formed in such a way that they cannot be falsified by data.
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.0.20001202214744.02fc47d0@claborn.net> Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 21:54:52 -0600 From: wilson@claborn.net (Jonathan Wilson) Subject: Re: [SLE] apt/rpm At 08:10 PM 12/2/2000 -0600, you wrote:
No way I'm going to install that kind of software. An auto-loading rpm app would have. JLK
Um, wrong. First off you should be installing something that you don't understand onto a production box (i.e. mission critical server/workstations/grandma's only PC...etc....). Second, if you had read the article, or for that matter if you've ever used apt-get (and paid attention while you're doing it) it tells you what it's going to install BEFORE it installs it. If you ever see "patched kernel 2.2.17-xyz" you hit "n" for no. C'mon, you /have/ to pay attention, or else you'll be breaking libraries all the time. Second, if this kind of system is implemented properly, the way Debian did it, there will be a certain system with "stable" and "unstable" branches, as well as "commercial software" "international software" etc, just like Debian's systems. Untested never gets put in the stable section, you you'd be an idiot to install software from the unstable section on a production box. So basically, what you said is only true if you're installing software without paying attention to what's going on. NEVER install unstable software on a mission critical box.... JW
From: Jerry Kreps <jerrykreps@jlkreps.net> Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 08:24:23 -0600 Message-Id: <00120308242301.25314@JLKreps> Subject: Re: [SLE] apt/rpm On Saturday 02 December 2000 21:54, Jonathan Wilson wrote: Um, wrong yourself! Nowhere does it say in apt-get that the patch listed is not from the kernel team or that it is a first for a newbie kernel programmer... The rest of your comment I agree with, when refering to production boxes and your caveate: 'IF"
At 08:10 PM 12/2/2000 -0600, you wrote:
No way I'm going to install that kind of software. An auto-loading rpm app would have. JLK
Um, wrong. First off you should be installing something that you don't understand onto a production box (i.e. mission critical server/workstations/grandma's only PC...etc....). Second, if you had read the article, or for that matter if you've ever used apt-get (and paid attention while you're doing it) it tells you what it's going to install BEFORE it installs it. If you ever see "patched kernel 2.2.17-xyz" you hit "n" for no. C'mon, you /have/ to pay attention, or else you'll be breaking libraries all the time.
Second, if this kind of system is implemented properly, the way Debian did it, there will be a certain system with "stable" and "unstable" branches, as well as "commercial software" "international software" etc, just like Debian's systems. Untested never gets put in the stable section, you you'd be an idiot to install software from the unstable section on a production box.
So basically, what you said is only true if you're installing software without paying attention to what's going on.
NEVER install unstable software on a mission critical box....
JW
-- Scientific theories, according to Sir Karl Popper, can be "falsified," or proven wrong, by experiment. Unscientific theories -Marxist dialectical history and Freudian psychology were Popper's favorites- are formed in such a way that they cannot be falsified by data.
participants (3)
-
jerrykreps＠jlkreps.net -
tomas＠primenet.com -
wilson＠claborn.net