Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
An unexpected perf feature
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
PostgreSQL 9.3 beta: Federated databases and more
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 9, 2013
Well, it doesn't seem too hard to add this feature to RPM, no?
Deb -> Rpm?
Posted May 14, 2012 18:23 UTC (Mon) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)
Another feature that .deb supports is the multilib capability (as opposed to the /lib /lib32 approach)
the RPM folks are welcome to implement these features (as they have copied other features from .deb, resulting in things like yum in the past), but since they haven't, it precludes rpm from being the 'universal' packaging tool that some people want it to be.
And this completely ignores other possible packaging tools and requirements that source-based distros like gentoo have
Posted May 14, 2012 18:48 UTC (Mon) by boudewijn (subscriber, #14185)
I hate creating debs, I hate creating rpms, I hate creating tarballs or bitrock installers -- but most of all I hate having to do essentially the same job twice.
I don't give a damn about the package format, not as a Linux user, not as a software developer. Rpm and deb both just work, and I just don't like the fact that there are two of them, and that people actually can bring up the enthusiasm to defend one against the other.
Posted May 14, 2012 19:25 UTC (Mon) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313)
I understand that the Suse buildforge does this for you, and I believe that the code to do this is available.
plus there is the alien program that will take a .deb and convert it to a .rpm (and vice-versa)
so the cost of creating both formats (if you don't care about the distro specific policies) looks like one line in a build script. hardly a crushing load.
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds