Activity depends on Fedora-packaged binary code

[Bernardo Innocenti]

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

>> This thing obviously doesn't scale and in the long term we
>> may end up reinventing a full blown package manager with
>> dependency tracking, plus tools like apt for downloading
>> and installing them.
> 
> I've spent a fair amount of time with both "yum" and "apt" and I fail to 
> see any "superiority" of apt over yum. Then again, my main distro is 
> Gentoo, and I *know* Portage (and recompiling everything on an XO) isn't 
> going to scale. :)

Oh, I wasn't implying we should switch to apt.  Wwhen I wrote
"tools like apt", I really meant to say "any package installer".

(But if you ask me, I also used both very extensively and find
apt+dpkg much faster and more usable than yum+rpm.  Flames to
private mail, please :-)


> But seriously, does the XO really need two package managers? What's 
> wrong with Fedora/RPM/yum? Do people really need to spend ergs on 
> supporting Debian?

I also think we should settle on just *one*.  And I'd certainly
prefer yum+rpm over any mixture of incompatible package formats
and update tools we could come up with.

This is going to bite when people start upgrading the base OS
and find that activities break, or the customizations they
made get silently undone, etc.

-- 
 \___/
 |___|   Bernardo Innocenti - http://www.codewiz.org/
  \___\  One Laptop Per Child - http://www.laptop.org/