Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] packages
From: D. Stimits (stimits_AT_idcomm.com)
Date: Fri Jul 20 2001 - 11:07:37 EEST
Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>
> (I apologize if something substantially similar to this goes out
> twice -- I meant to send it to the list, but it seems to have fallen
> in a hole...).
>
> My last experience with RPMs, just under a year ago, convinced me that
> they are basically broken. Every distribution has its own set, and
> it's pretty much a crapshoot whether one distribution's packages will
> work with another. Worse, one of them uses its own version numbering
> which is incompatible with all the others (and with the ``standard''
> versioning of the software in the packages), and uses higher numbers
> so it will fool the package searching software into always thinking
> their version is the most current. I got out during the incompatible
> version 3 vs. version 4 RPM format debacle, before the 2.96 disaster.
The change from version 3 to 4 of rpm tool sucked (it was a sad thing
back then to get rpm's for the older systems when it was all coming out
for the newer ones). But there is now a version that is both backwards
compatible (since probably last autumn).
>
> Debian, on the other hand, appears to exert some sort of control over
> their package maintainers that means a .deb package will either just
> plain work, or will give me complaints about incompatibilities before
> I download. I run the unstable distribution, and have rarely had
> anything go wrong at all (the gimp-print problems being a conspicuous
> exception, I'm afraid). doing a .deb package of Ardour wouldn't be
> such a bad idea...
I have never heard a bad thing about debian packages, and quite a few
good things. Unfortunately, I have to deal with other software support,
and chose the distribution most users will have. The side issue for RH
over debian was that I needed the best hardware accel OpenGL I could get
for free, and RH wins this (they lose a few other areas, but for
hardware accel setup and video card detect, they do extremely
well...Mandrake is probably a close second in that case). Wouldn't it be
nice if there was a tool that understood all of the tools equally, and
could convert at will?
Unfortunately, I am somewhat of a hypocrite, because I have never
personally learned to create my own rpm's or deb's. The amount of effort
and what I do means I also tend to put out tarballs, but then someone
else in the group always does the packaging, so it works out.
D. Stimits, stimits_AT_idcomm.com
> --
> Joseph J. Pfeiffer, Jr., Ph.D. Phone -- (505) 646-1605
> Department of Computer Science FAX -- (505) 646-1002
> New Mexico State University http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~pfeiffer
> SWNMRSEF: http://www.nmsu.edu/~scifair
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Jul 20 2001 - 11:09:15 EEST