portage vs yum

[Jochen Schlick]

Kelly wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 27, 2007 9:51 pm Thufir wrote:
>> Going back to expediency, ebuild ease of creation versus rpm ease of
>> creation:  e-builds are easier due to the looser integration?  What are
>> other factors, please?
> 
> I don't know about ebuilds, but RPM's are insanely easy to build if you know 
> how.  I mean, you can tear off a huge collection of RPM's in a very short 
> time with a bit of knowledge of the spec file, and technically generating 
> your own RPM's = compiling from source anyway (I did 5 packages yesterday in 
> half an hour, though I doubt they'd fit the project's guidelines...).
> 
> I much prefer RPM to other systems I've used to handle this sort of thing, 
> because they're easy to make and easy to use.
> 

There is !no! difference in complexity of ebuild creation or rpm-spec
creation. If you have a broken source tar-file and want to create
an ebuild or a rpm-spec you have the !same! problems with your
rpm-spec-file as with your ebuild file. You have nearly the same
pre/post(un)install scripts to write and the runtime/buildtime
dependency hell is also the same (ebuild:RDEPEND/DEPEND,
spec:Requires/BuildRequires...) Therefore I can't see that ebuilds
are looser integrated. Perhaps you must be a better shell programmer
when you want to create your own ebuilds - that's all.


best regards
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jochen Schlick