On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 09:37:05AM -0600, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > On Tuesday 19 December 2006 08:53, Luis Villa wrote: > > On 12/19/06, Matt Domsch <matt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 12:46:49AM -0500, Christopher Blizzard wrote: > > > > I just noticed that we passed through the 5k packages mark in extras. > > > > Kinda neat - seems to be continuing to slowly grow. :D > > > > > > well, 2500 (exactly) SRPMS, but yes, quite an accomplishment. > > > > I know this is sort of a bogus stat, but has anyone considered > > graphing this growth against the growth of debian and opensuse? One of > > the big criticisms of fedora/RH was always that, compared to debian > > and suse, there were many fewer centrally packaged programs which > > could be relied upon to cleanly install and run, so it seems like > > showing that Fedora is growing in this respect would be a nice > > marketing point. > > > > Luis > One thing that needs consideration in the comparison is that debain splits > things up in to the smallest possible binary package. We do not do that. > the fairest comparison is to look at the Sources. > by my count Fedora (core+extras) has ~3600 SRPMS > by a count in #suse 3015 src.rpm, 54 nosrc.rpm (not sure what a nosrc.rpm is > but i guess proprietary stuff) It's a src.rpm w/o (some) Sources. E.g. it's supposed to be used when you are not allowed to ship sources at all or modified sources. It isn't though any SuSE proprietary mechanism in rpm, it is available in Fedora, too, just not used. :) > Debian im still looking to find numbers. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpII7vqbJit0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
