apt vs urpmi

[Vincent Danen]

* Panu Matilainen <pmatilai at laiskiainen.org> [2006-05-03 19:20:03 +0300]:

> On Wed, 2006-05-03 at 09:46 -0600, Vincent Danen wrote:
> > * Panu Matilainen <pmatilai at laiskiainen.org> [2006-05-03 02:25:09 -0700]:
> > > Yup, apt-rpm development was pretty much dead for the last two years with 
> > > the main developer Gustavo Niemeyer working on Smart almost exclusively 
> > > and dropped apt-rpm activities completely last year. I can't make any 
> > > guarantees about future development of apt-rpm but as there IS interest in 
> > > it still it's likely that the development/maintenance will continue, at 
> > > least there's no shortage of ideas at the moment: :)
> > > http://apt-rpm.laiskiainen.org/roadmap.shtml
> > 
> > I was reading the roadmap which is what made me think it was back in
> > more-or-less active development.  The fact that the website had a lot of
> > last-modified dates of last month helped as well.  =)
> 
> Heh, well the website was only created last month :D

Well, that explains it then... =)  Still shows interest tho, otherwise
you wouldn't have bothered.. =)

> > > > Essentially, I'm wondering if it would be worth the time to look at
> > > > apt-rpm as an alternative/replacement for urpmi in Annvix.
> > > 
> > > Well, apt is pretty powerful but rather complex beast and certainly has 
> > > it's quirks. It's also kinda niche market these days, the big rpm-based 
> > > distros are preferring other alternatives. Whether it suits your purposes 
> > > - hard to say. If you have some more detailed concerns of whether 
> > > something is doable with apt / how things work etc I'll be happy to 
> > > answer.
> > 
> > Well, I don't have anything specific yet because I'm moderately familiar
> > with apt, and even then only on OS X with fink.  But the answers you've
> > provided are enough that I can start to experiment with it and, for a
> > time, maybe have it in parallel with urpmi (at least on the development
> > branch) and we'll see where it leads.
> > 
> > One question I do have is in regards to these new dependencies that are
> > out there, such as perl(Net::SNMP) for instance, vs. a dependency on a
> > package name.  If an rpm depends on perl(Net::SNMP) rather than
> > perl-Net-SNMP, will apt properly install perl-Net-SNMP (which also
> > provides perl(Net::SNMP))?  I believe with newer rpm there are other
> > similar non-package-name type dependencies.  Does apt handle those?
> 
> Yup, no problemo, they're just like any old dependencies on so-names or
> depedencies on manual provides from apt's POV. Also arbitrary file
> dependencies which at least RH/FC camp is using heavily are fully
> supported.

Fantastic!  Well, I think I need to download and start fiddling with it
then.  =)

-- 
Annvix - Secure Linux Server: http://annvix.org/
"lynx -source http://linsec.ca/vdanen.asc | gpg --import"
{FEE30AD4 : 7F6C A60C 06C2 4811 FA1C  A2BC 2EBC 5E32 FEE3 0AD4}
Wasting time like it was free...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.laiskiainen.org/pipermail/apt-rpm-laiskiainen.org/attachments/20060503/99b7cd8f/attachment-0003.pgp>