nodata wrote:
I think so, yes. If not, why was yum developed?
It was developed initially by another vendor, Yellow Dog Linux. It wasn't developed for Fedora.
Personally, I'm a apt person. I find it takes less time to do what I want it to do: apt certainly starts faster, and the search facility is much better, but yum does have that nice groupinstall option.
And you are obviously not a person using multiarch, or you'd quickly find out where apt id deficient
Another advantage of apt is that it still works when you break your python install..
That argument is a red herring. Are you more likely to break, for example, your python install than, say, the more-often-updated glibc install (which would break all package managers, really)?
up2date can't handle 404s, it just dies. up2date's gui will blank out all important information. I'm guessing it's a threading problem - I don't know.
*shrug* I use the text version. However bugs are bugs - they need to be fixed, and I certainly wouldn't call the bugs described above the reason to jettison a whole app.
A healthy bit of competition between yum and apt is always good, but I can't see a good reason for up2date any more - is there one? :)
#1 reason our organization uses it? Support for more *types* of repositories than apt and yum combined, complete with cross-dependency checking for all.
So, there's two big reasons right there, to answer your question. -- Ken Snider