-----Original Message-----
From: centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of m.roth@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: 16 September 2013 18:05
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: Evergreen ILS on CentOS?
James Freer wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Sep 2013, m.roth@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> Can you say, "dependency hell"?
>>
>> I suspect they wrote it on Ubuntu (this is client/server software,
>> dunno why they'd do that). At any rate, I yum installed the
>> postgresql 9.x
>
> I don't think it is appropriate to be derogatory to other distros.
> Before yum there was 'dependency hell'. However, bear in mind apt-get
> is a
superior
> package manager to yum... not my opinion but the opinion of many.
Let's see, where to begin to respond...
1. This *is* the CentOS list, last time I looked. We don't use apt-get.
2. A fair bit of the system software on ubuntu is several releases newer;
therefore, anything written on the current release of that will not
run on an enterprise distro for years.
3. Ubuntu is, as far as I can tell, targeted at the desktop user. It is *not*
targeted for servers.
Ubuntu has both desktop and server versions. Further, it also has Long Term Support versions that are supported for 5 years and are broadly equivalent to CentOS Major versions.
http://www.ubuntu.com/server
When I was there Google ran its entire server fleet on Ubuntu. I'd say that counts as enterprise servers. If you count AMIs rather than actual instances, Ubuntu is far and away the most popular distro on Amazon Web Services:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/is-ubuntu-becoming-a-big-name-in-enterprise-linux-servers/10602
4. Finally, yum has nothing to do with this: it's all repo software, not
how I get it.
Now, I AM most certainly derogatory about the developers. *Most* large organizations, and larger libraries, are *not* going to be running The Latest Ubuntu, with Unity, or whatever; that *is* who, by default, they're targeting. Now, if the software was intended for home users (and I need to implement a library system for my own library), that would be fine. But it's a bad idea for the actual target audience.
Of those web sites running Linux, more than half run either Ubuntu or Debian (and CentOS barely edges out Ubuntu alone):
http://w3techs.com/technologies/details/os-linux/all/all
So a simple majority of the administrators of those sites would prefer .deb over .rpm packages.
In summary, point 2) above is mooted by the existence of LTS Ubuntu versions, and point 3) is just plain wrong, I'm afraid. But I'll grant you points 1) and 4). :)
Tony.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com ______________________________________________________________________
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.3408 / Virus Database: 3222/6669 - Release Date: 09/15/13
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
