Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on January 20, 2007 07:20 AM
Two things:
1) If RPM and DEB have been in place for years and work well, why should they change? Calling this resistance "not-invented-here" forgets the point that Autopackage came *later*.
2) Why should they change to Autopackage and not SMART or Conary? From the last time I checked, Autopackage was "just another package manager" and it insists on installing (or worse, uninstalling) to the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr directory even though that could mess up the native package management. SMART and Conary seemed to handle this better, and Conary at least addresses incremental updates better than either DEBs or RPMs (similar to Portage).
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Missing two points
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on January 20, 2007 07:20 AM1) If RPM and DEB have been in place for years and work well, why should they change? Calling this resistance "not-invented-here" forgets the point that Autopackage came *later*.
2) Why should they change to Autopackage and not SMART or Conary? From the last time I checked, Autopackage was "just another package manager" and it insists on installing (or worse, uninstalling) to the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr directory even though that could mess up the native package management. SMART and Conary seemed to handle this better, and Conary at least addresses incremental updates better than either DEBs or RPMs (similar to Portage).
#