LinuxQuestions.org
Did you know LQ has a Linux Hardware Compatibility List?
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General
User Name
Password
Linux - General This Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.

Notices

View Poll Results: Which do you like better .deb or .rpm
I prefer Debs 5 50.00%
I prefer RPMs 5 50.00%
Voters: 10. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 10-18-2005, 08:09 PM   #1
rmckayfleming
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Distribution: Ubuntu 6.06 LTS
Posts: 25

Rep: Reputation: 15
Lightbulb Red Hat Installer, vs Debian Installer


I was wondering if it was possible to use .deb packages in anaconda? Any input? What I would like to do is to use .deb packages with a graphical installer. And finally which packager is better? Thanks
 
Old 10-19-2005, 04:27 AM   #2
reddazz
Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: N. E. England
Distribution: Fedora, CentOS, Debian
Posts: 16,298

Rep: Reputation: 73
I think anaconda has already been ported to Progeny Debian (and other non rpm based distros e.g. VidaLinux). As for preference, I prefer rpms but like apt very much. I am not well versed about the technical difference between the two, so I won't comment on that.
 
Old 10-19-2005, 05:20 AM   #3
spooon
Senior Member
 
Registered: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,755

Rep: Reputation: 48
RPM isn't only used on RedHat, it's also used in most Linux distros and some non-Linux OS's, and is part of the Linux Standard Base (LSB). DEB is used on Debian-based distros, like Debian, Ubuntu, MEPIS, Knoppix, etc. What you use depends mainly on your distro. I think it's a bad idea to have use both systems together on a system. There is a program called "alien" that can convert between .deb and .rpm packages.

They both have advantages and disadvantages. (Talking about this might lead to a flame war though.) DEB has been around longer, but I think RPM is more widely used. I think both formats maintain a database of all the packages, their dependencies, and their files so that packages can be easily removed, updated, or queried.

For .deb files, the basic program that install them is "dpkg" and advanced package management (using repositories, resolving dependencies) is done with the Apt programs (apt-get, etc.) or its GUIs (Aptitude, Synaptic). For RPMs, the basic program is "rpm" and there are many advanced package management programs, like: Yum / Yumex, Urpmi / RpmDrake (Mandriva), Yast (Suse), Smartpm, Apt4rpm / Synaptic, and others.
 
Old 10-19-2005, 06:37 AM   #4
rmckayfleming
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Distribution: Ubuntu 6.06 LTS
Posts: 25

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
See why I want to know is because i'm going to create a distro (my previous post), and I was wondering if i could get anaconda to install .deb's instead of RPM's? any thoughts.
 
Old 10-19-2005, 08:04 AM   #5
reddazz
Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: N. E. England
Distribution: Fedora, CentOS, Debian
Posts: 16,298

Rep: Reputation: 73
Quote:
Originally posted by spooon
RPM isn't only used on RedHat, it's also used in most Linux distros and some non-Linux OS's, and is part of the Linux Standard Base (LSB). DEB is used on Debian-based distros, like Debian, Ubuntu, MEPIS, Knoppix, etc. What you use depends mainly on your distro. I think it's a bad idea to have use both systems together on a system. There is a program called "alien" that can convert between .deb and .rpm packages.

They both have advantages and disadvantages. (Talking about this might lead to a flame war though.) DEB has been around longer, but I think RPM is more widely used. I think both formats maintain a database of all the packages, their dependencies, and their files so that packages can be easily removed, updated, or queried.

For .deb files, the basic program that install them is "dpkg" and advanced package management (using repositories, resolving dependencies) is done with the Apt programs (apt-get, etc.) or its GUIs (Aptitude, Synaptic). For RPMs, the basic program is "rpm" and there are many advanced package management programs, like: Yum / Yumex, Urpmi / RpmDrake (Mandriva), Yast (Suse), Smartpm, Apt4rpm / Synaptic, and others.
Deb hasn't been around longer than rpm. Redhat introduced RPM in 1995 (previously they used something called RPP), debs were introduced a bit later than that and apt around 1998.
 
Old 10-19-2005, 11:28 AM   #6
Lleb_KCir
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Orlando FL
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 1,765

Rep: Reputation: 45
http://openskills.info/infobox.php?ID=1094

according to that RH has been around since 1994 (mothers day to be specific)

http://telemetrybox.org/tokyo/

and that states that debian has been around since 1995.

so the RH distro has been around longer, but when you look deeper Debian has been around since 1993

http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/pr...-intro.en.html

reading this indicates that the .deb has been around since debian started in one form or an other.

i personally like apt-get vs yum as it is faster in resolving dependencies and just works. yes yum works but as stated it is much slower, but both do their job very well.

as for dpkg and rpm both are very easy to work with, but can lead to dependency hell more so in rpm then dpkg as most things that can be installed in debian can be installed via apt-get so you do not have to worry as much about dependency hell like you do with rpm based distros. for that reason alone i like debian based over rpm based better.

as for what installer i like better? well now that i know enough about linux to work with it i like the CLI better as it is faster and cleaner, but for a newbie i LOVED the RH installer. extremely simple to figure out and if you can install windows you can install linux with the RH GUI installer. to me that was a god send at getting my hands clean with linux.

if you could make a .deb distro with the GUI installer from the RPM based distros that would be very sweet for helping newbies convert into linux onto the not so newbie friendly distros that are .deb based.
 
Old 10-19-2005, 01:23 PM   #7
reddazz
Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: N. E. England
Distribution: Fedora, CentOS, Debian
Posts: 16,298

Rep: Reputation: 73
Debian was started in 1993 but the packaging system was not debs, debs were introduced sometime later. Redhat was started in 94 but didn't use rpm until sometime in 1995. I read this somewhere recently and will post the link when I find it.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
(K)Ubuntu installer failing to load installer components from CD. slackyoda Ubuntu 5 07-20-2005 03:06 PM
What Does The UT2004 Installer Do Behind The Fancy GUI Installer? Tsuroerusu Linux - Games 2 09-09-2004 02:37 PM
Red Hat Install Aborts After Signal 11 Sent to Installer danny_beta_read Red Hat 2 03-06-2004 02:24 PM
Modifying Red hat 9 installer Arcticfox Red Hat 2 12-09-2003 07:18 PM
Red Hat 9 installer destroyed my system davebot 0.9 Linux - Distributions 2 11-16-2003 03:17 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:56 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration