Dependency hell

[Russell Coker]

On Mon, 12 Apr 2004 20:00, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Apr 12, 2004, Russell Coker <russell at coker.com.au> wrote:
> >> > However I expect apt to be phased out, so it's probably not worth
> >> > doing.
> >>
> >> I don't see it going away anytime soon.
> >
> > So we will have both apt and yum doing much the same thing?
>
> We (Fedora Core) don't ship apt (ATM?), but there's no reason to make
> the life of those who prefer apt over yum or up2date more difficult.
> Especially after all of them switch to a common repository format.
> And even more so considering that we don't have a GUI front-end for
> Extras similar to synaptics (that I've never used myself, FWIW)
>
> It's about choice.  It's not like we should decide whether our users
> should use Gnome or KDE; GNU Emacs or XEmacs or vim or whatever.

True, we want to give choice.  But when deciding how much work we want to 
spend on supporting one particular choice we have to think about how much use 
it's going to get.  I was under the impression that yum was the preferred 
choice as apt was designed to work best for Debian packages with separate 
install and configure stages etc.

-- 
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/   My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/  Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/    Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/  My home page