Less zelotism, please [LWN.net]

Less zelotism, please

Posted Oct 21, 2004 22:10 UTC (Thu) by piman (subscriber, #8957)
In reply to: Less zelotism, please by X-Nc
Parent article: Ubuntu Linux and the future of Debian

Actually, there are people (myself included) that will argue dpkg/.deb is better engineered than RPM, even without getting into support infrastructure Debian has and RPM-based distros have borrowed in the past (alternatives the menuing system for example). No attempts at an inherently broken "file dependencies" system, proper virtual package support, recommends and suggests, and per-package or local file diversions. When making packages, debhelper and CDBS make producing high-quality packages that integrate into Debian a breeze, compared to spec file making. When the surrounding tools like aptitude, debconf, and deborphan/debfoster are thrown it, it's very easy to call Debian's package system unequaled.

It's great that APT can support RPM now, and I agree that closed the gap significantly. But RPM still has a long way to go, and it doesn't help that there are competing incompatible versions of it.

(Log in to post comments)

Less zelotism, please

Posted Oct 22, 2004 1:26 UTC (Fri) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]

How about acknowledging some of the drawbacks of apt/dpkg? For instance, the dpkg database is sloooow. Debconf has become an annoyance, stopping most installs to ask inane questions (even with priority set to the highest. Many packages force you to learn obscure infrastructure (alsa modutils, a2enmod, etc). It's hard to know what force flags to use. It's embarrasingly difficult to install an equiv for any nontrivial package. Etc...

Personally, I'd say the original poster had it right: RPM and apt/dpkg each have their benefits and drawbacks. Personally, I've used Debian for the past 4 years because it's been the best tool for the job. This week, though, I did replace 2 of my 3 Sid machines with Ubuntu...

Less zelotism, please

Posted Oct 22, 2004 3:09 UTC (Fri) by daniels (subscriber, #16193) [Link]

Debconf has become an annoyance, stopping most installs to ask inane questions (even with priority set to the highest.

This isn't a fundamental flaw in Debconf itself -- just its misuse. One thing Ubuntu has done has been to ensure a lot of these questions are not shown; either ignoring notes that are unimportant to the user, or taking sensible default to questions that have them.

Many packages force you to learn obscure infrastructure (alsa modutils, a2enmod, etc).

I would argue that a2enmod is no more obscure than editing the apache config file, and it's well-documented (bias alert: I wrote it).

It's hard to know what force flags to use.

dpkg --force-help tells you, but you shouldn't ever need to use it.

A bit OT re: a2enmod

Posted Oct 22, 2004 4:43 UTC (Fri) by tsinclai (subscriber, #11399) [Link]

You wrote a2enmod?

I teach a class in Linux system administration and switched recently from Red Hat to Debian (via
Knoppix) and I must say that the way the apache2 package is organized is much easier to
manage and your scripts (did you do a2demod as well?), while obvious in hindsight, make my job
a lot easier.

I modified the scripts to create the equivalent functionality for enabling and disabling sites.

Anyway, much thanks for your good work!