apt-rpm supported?

[Panu Matilainen]

On Thu, 6 Nov 2003, seth vidal wrote:

> 
> >     Odd. I only looked into Fedora in the first place to use apt-rpm.
> > I'm quite surprised to hear that it's not yet officially supported. As a
> > long-time Debian user, it made me feel very comfortable on an rpm-based
> > distro. 
> >     Any good comparisons of the two? Can I install based on pathname,
> > libname in yum? Is the search facility as good as "apt-cache"? 
> 
> yum search and yum provides

I think Michael meant this:
[root at localhost pmatilai]# apt-get install libgphoto2.so.2
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
Note, selecting gphoto2 instead of libgphoto2.so.2
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  gphoto2
0 packages upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 removed and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 646kB of archives.
After unpacking 2177kB of additional disk space will be used.
Get:1 http://linox 4.0/i386/RedHat/main gphoto2 2.1.0-7 [646kB]
Fetched 646kB in 2s (287kB/s)
Checking GPG signatures...
Executing RPM (-Uvh)...
Preparing...                ########################################### 
[100%]
   1:gphoto2                ########################################### 
[100%]
[root at localhost pmatilai]#

The deal here is that apt considers every "provides" as a package (a
"virtual package" in apt terminology). As long as there's only one package 
providing something it automatically installs that, otherwise it makes you 
choose one from available variants.

	- Panu -