portage vs yum

Ray Van Dolson rayvd at bludgeon.org
Wed Jun 27 22:40:11 UTC 2007

> > Sabayon may have screwed things up, but a system which compiles most 
> > things from source in a portage type way, with a few exceptions which are 
> > time intensive, would be easier to maintain and thus larger.  Open 
> > Office, the kernel, things like that could be prebuilt.
> Easier to maintain, for whom?  The package/distro builders?
> Certainly not for an average end-user.
> Reading opinions like these, I have the impression that most people
> only think of individual, hacker-type users, not about, say, system
> administrators maintaining large networks of systems, having to
> support those systems (and users) easily, etc.  

I think that's the crux of it... not many of us running many servers
enjoy the idea of our machines chugging away CPU cycles compiling all
sorts of new packages.

Seems like the main issue here is wanting/needing more packages
available for Fedora rather than whether yum vs portage is appropriate.
So pitch in and help package or make some suggestions on streamlining
the process... asking Fedora to switch to portage is just not a very
realistic thing to ask for IMO. :)


More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list