Yup, I still appreciate it - it is a tool which sits on top of RPM to provide Dependency resolution and repository handling capabilities. Mandrake provide there own GUI tools, collectively called drakrpm.
So the stack goes:
1) RPM
2) URPMI
3) DrakRPM
Ubuntu which uses the Debian packaging system
Ah, the debian package management system. I like this too, I tend to use debian on my servers...
The debian package management system has a number of layers as well. The grand parent mentioned dpkg, this is the base of the "debian package management system. As with RPMs, this is unable to automatically resolve dependencies. Above this are dselect and apt - one is a ncurses front end to dpkg, the other a set of command line utilities, which provides the automatic dependency resolution. Above that there are, like drakrpm in Mandrake (or now Mandriva), various GUIs which utilise the apt tools.
So the stack goes:
1) dpkg
2) apt / dselect
3) Synaptic
Now, as you may be able to see from the too above lists, each stack is made up of 3 levels. Early RPM based systems historically stopped at level 1. I.e. all package management had to be done with RPM, however for many years Mandrake have included URPMI, other rpm distributions have similar tools.
Debians complementary stack was historically a little more advanced, it was at level 2 and most people consider the "Debian packaging system" to referrer to the apt set of tools. Later GUI apps were placed on top.
Though developed later URPMI is just the RPM systems equivalent to apt, thus when making comparisons, comparisons should be made between dpkg and rpm; urpmi and apt or Synaptic and drakrpm.
In your original post you inferred a comparison between rpm and apt. As the grand parent post pointed out and as I have detailed above, the correct comparison would be between dpkg and rpm - which have similar roles. Therefore the grand parent's point still stands.
As for Debian systems tending to be more stable than Redhat based ones, this many be more of an issue of philosophies. Debian strives to provide a very stable system, Redhat to provide as stable a system as can be with up-to-date versions of packages. Debian achieves its stability at the expense of having completely up-to-date versions of packages. A cursory glance would suggest that this is not the case with Ubuntu, so as to why it is more stable I can only assume that this is either down to the polish placed on the packages by each distribution or by not comparing the latest versions of each distribution respectively - don't forget that each distribution is built vastly on top of identical code.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:*sigh*
Posted by: mwelchuk on May 31, 2005 05:56 AMRight here goes with the explanation:
I loved the URPMI
Yup, I still appreciate it - it is a tool which sits on top of RPM to provide Dependency resolution and repository handling capabilities. Mandrake provide there own GUI tools, collectively called drakrpm.
So the stack goes:
1) RPM
2) URPMI
3) DrakRPM
Ubuntu which uses the Debian packaging system
Ah, the debian package management system. I like this too, I tend to use debian on my servers...
The debian package management system has a number of layers as well. The grand parent mentioned dpkg, this is the base of the "debian package management system. As with RPMs, this is unable to automatically resolve dependencies. Above this are dselect and apt - one is a ncurses front end to dpkg, the other a set of command line utilities, which provides the automatic dependency resolution. Above that there are, like drakrpm in Mandrake (or now Mandriva), various GUIs which utilise the apt tools.
So the stack goes:
1) dpkg
2) apt / dselect
3) Synaptic
Now, as you may be able to see from the too above lists, each stack is made up of 3 levels. Early RPM based systems historically stopped at level 1. I.e. all package management had to be done with RPM, however for many years Mandrake have included URPMI, other rpm distributions have similar tools.
Debians complementary stack was historically a little more advanced, it was at level 2 and most people consider the "Debian packaging system" to referrer to the apt set of tools. Later GUI apps were placed on top.
Though developed later URPMI is just the RPM systems equivalent to apt, thus when making comparisons, comparisons should be made between dpkg and rpm; urpmi and apt or Synaptic and drakrpm.
In your original post you inferred a comparison between rpm and apt. As the grand parent post pointed out and as I have detailed above, the correct comparison would be between dpkg and rpm - which have similar roles. Therefore the grand parent's point still stands.
As for Debian systems tending to be more stable than Redhat based ones, this many be more of an issue of philosophies. Debian strives to provide a very stable system, Redhat to provide as stable a system as can be with up-to-date versions of packages. Debian achieves its stability at the expense of having completely up-to-date versions of packages. A cursory glance would suggest that this is not the case with Ubuntu, so as to why it is more stable I can only assume that this is either down to the polish placed on the packages by each distribution or by not comparing the latest versions of each distribution respectively - don't forget that each distribution is built vastly on top of identical code.
#