On Fri, 24 Nov 2006, Gilboa Davara wrote:
On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 19:27 +0100, Leszek Matok wrote:
Now you're comparing apples and oranges. I was talking about apt from
Extras, using repomd repositories. You're comparing yum with Debian's
apt with their repos (different number of files and packages; should be
greater, but I don't know if "main" contains all their packages, or is
it something like our "Core").
apt-rpm also has its own repo format which is much faster to download
and parse than repomd. You should check it out :)
Lam
I would have conducted an apt-rpm vs yum test, but I'm on x86_64, and
last time I checked, apt has lousy bi-arch support. (Did it improve)
Apt works on x86_64 nowadays but can't handle some cross-arch cases
like upgrading from 32bit to 64bit version (eg OOo changed from 32bit to
64bit between fc5 to fc6). Yum's bi-arch support is lightyears ahead
anyway :)
FYI I'm using Debian unstable which has comparable number of packages.
Debian apt is not comparable at all due to differences in package and
repository metadata differences; Debian uses flat text files whereas we
have rather heavyweight XML to wrestle with.
- Panu -
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
