Debian

[Liam Proven]

On 17/09/2007, Mihamina (R12y) Rakotomandimby
<mihamina.rakotomandimby at etu.univ-orleans.fr> wrote:
> Liam Proven wrote:
>
> >> rpm - dpkg
> >> apt - yum(fedora)/urpmi(mandriva)/yast(suse)
> > I disagree. There is no benefit at all in distinguishing between the
> > end-user tools used to manipulate packages, because there are dozens.
> > Both apt and dpkg are package tools, as are aptitude, synaptic,
> > kpackage and many others.
>
> Nope. apt cant be used without dpkg.

Yes, it can.

> It's a layer matter.

True, but you are focussing on a mid-level layer, one which is subject
to change. If you want to make comparisons, you need to look at the
bottom layer, and that is not the package-management tool, it is the
package. Or rather, the format of the package.

It is as futile to ask which came first as to ask it of the chicken and the egg.

> Yast/URPMI/Yum is on rpm.
> Apt is on dpkg.
> Synaptic is on apt which is on dpkg.
>
> >  - Debian derivatives use .DEB (managed underneath by dpkg and apt and
> > so on, but that is irrelevant; you can get APT for RPM now, for
> > instance)
>
> Yes, it existed, but it did not get "famous", because it was a bad idea.

That is contentious.

I would say that it didn't work particularly well because the RPM
format was not built around the idea of packages coming in
repositories with automatic dependency resolution; this was added on
later by adding additional layers of package management tools, such as
/yum/ and /urmpi/. Debian did it right by planning it from the start
and having it in there from very early stages.

Which is ultimately why Ubuntu, and via Ubuntu, Debian, is basically
winning the distro wars as we speak.

There have been lots of efforts to "improve" Debian before now, either
by just wrapping a nice graphical installer on it (Stormix), or by
making the desktop more Windows-like (Corel/Xandros), or by making it
consumer-friendly (Lindows/Linspire/Freespire), or by modularising it
(Progeny) or by removing most of the installation choices and putting
a system admin tool in front (Libranet). All have, to a greater or
lesser degree, failed.

Ubuntu stuck to the Debian principles - keep it completely free, give
it away, encourage sharing - but gave its spin of Debian a new focus:
produce a simple, integrated, idiot-proof graphical desktop, no more,
no less.

The result? In under 3y, it's become the most popular distro in the
world and still growing fast.

I suspect - and devoutly hope - that the board at a certain large
Seattle-based software corporation are watching in trembling terror.

And why is Ubuntu winning over other simple graphical desktops?
Because it's free and it's easy to add and remove programs and it's
easy to upgrade to new versions. Why? Because of the Debian packaging
system.

I have, over the last decade, moved from early playing about with
Slackware and Lasermoon Linux/FT to actually using Red Hat, then to
Caldera to SuSE and finally to Ubuntu. I know what RPM is like and I
know what the alternatives are like. Debian was one of the first
distros and I think it will be one of the last. I suspect Red Hat and
RPM are going to end up in a small, shrinking (but lucrative) niche in
corporate data centres, because of tie-ups with big vendors. Outside
the enterprise, I can't see anyone taking on Ubuntu now.

> > The best thing to use to ditinguish and compare is the lowest common
> > denominator, the package format itself, not the tools used to
> > manipulate those packages, because those vary widely and have multiple
> > alternatives simultaneously available.
>
> Huge debate then. My POV is definitely not yours...

Then refute me. Give me evidence why I am wrong and you are right.

-- 
Liam Proven • Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/liamproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk • GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 • Cell: +44 7939-087884 • Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AOL/AIM/iChat: liamproven at aol.com • MSN/Messenger: lproven at hotmail.com
Yahoo: liamproven at yahoo.co.uk • Skype: liamproven • ICQ: 73187508