das ook zever, ubuntu gebruikt dpkg/apt als package management software en das zowa het neusje van de zalm kwa package/dependency management, beter als rpm/urpmi imo.
http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/192/
http://apt4rpm.sourceforge.net/faq.html#q1
ok, het is niet echt fair apt te vegelijken met rpm omdat rpm op hetzelfde niveau ligt als dpkg en geen dependency handling doet.
hier toch wat ervaringen van apt vs urpmi:
I've used Debian in the past and have been using Mandrake for about 3 years. While urpmi is in the same application category, I wouldn't say "no better or worse". In my experience, apt wins hands down. I wish Mandrake would use apt-rpm instead of urpmi.
When I used apt and something bad happened, like a lost internet connection, apt-get would pick up on the byte it left off (as would dselect before it). I never had any connection difficulties with it.
urpmi, on the other hand, sometimes requires using the --wget option, because it will hang trying to download with its default curl (why is urpmi using external programs for download, anyway?) And, when something goes wrong, it tends to want to re-download everything, not pick up exactly where it left off.
I use Mandrake because it's kept up-to-date, menus are synced across window managers, and I can order cheap CD's to upgrade (I have a modem connection at home). urpmi is a weakness for me compared to apt-get, not a strength.
My whine is that I think http/ftp download should be more integrated into urpmi to begin with. A solid built-in mechanism would obviate the need for switching around downloading backends. It's clumsy to have to switch around backends for something so basic and which had been solved by Debian years before.
is dus zever
