apt vs yum

[Justin Georgeson]

Noah Silva [Mailing list] wrote:
> 
> Seems like "redhat people" like YUM better, while "Debian people" like APT
> better.. then again it was a rh based distro that ported APT.

I certainly agree with that.

> APT supposedly did some dirty tricks with RPM in the past..
> then again YUM seems to me infinitely slower than apt, and I like being
> able to use the same tool on my debian and redhat machines.

what dirty tricks? APT should do nothing more than search repositories 
for the specified package, check dependencies, download candidates, and 
call rpm.

> But I couldn't use APT on rawhide last I checked, so the point is moot.

not from redhat.com ofr fedora.us, but there is a rawhide APT repo on 
freshrpms.net.

rpm http://ayo.freshrpms.net/redhat rawhide/i386 os

I've trouble with the apt package from fedora.us, but the RH9 apt 
package from freshrpms.net seems to work just peachy.