[Mageia-discuss] Mageia-discuss - rpm or deb?

Mon Sep 27 10:10:44 CEST 2010

Pour moi cette idée est tous sauf débile, d'ailleurs j'avais fait la même 
reflexion il y a 2 ans dans les ideas mandriva.

Le principe existe dans un sens (rpm ---> deb) par le truchement de "alien" 
pourquoi ne pas le faire dans l'autre sens et allez plus loin en intégrant 
nativement le procédé à la distro.

Je ne crois qu'un utilisateur néophite ce pose la question de savoir si il doit 
utiliser un paquet rpm ou deb ou truc venu de l'espace.....

PS : J'ai d'ailleurs fais la même reflexion vis à vis de wine qui pour moi 
devrait être fondu dans la distro pour prendre en charge les .exe car une fois 
de plus l'utilisateur lambda (comme beaucoup des profs et élèves que je cotoie) 
se fiche du nom du sytème. Ils veulent que se soit beau et que sa fonctionne 
sans avoir a y passer des heures en documentation et essai.  PEUT ON LEUR EN 
VOULOIR ???

Donc pour moi +1 :-)

________________________________
De : "mageia-discuss-request at mageia.org" <mageia-discuss-request at mageia.org>
À : mageia-discuss at mageia.org
Envoyé le : Lun 27 septembre 2010, 3h 15min 31s
Objet : Mageia-discuss Digest, Vol 1, Issue 191

Send Mageia-discuss mailing list submissions to
    mageia-discuss at mageia.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
    https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-discuss
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
    mageia-discuss-request at mageia.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
    mageia-discuss-owner at mageia.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Mageia-discuss digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: rpm or deb? (Lucien-Henry Horvath)
   2. Re: Mageia's strategy (Frank Griffin)
   3. Re: Mageia's strategy (vfmBOFH)
   4. Mageia with Synaptic (paulo ricardo)
   5. Re: rpm or deb? (Tux99)
   6. Re: Mageia with Synaptic (Tux99)
   7. Mageia Developer Version/Edition? (Ireneusz Gierlach)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 00:40:44 +0200
From: Lucien-Henry Horvath <tempo2 at marneau.eu>
To: mageia-discuss at mageia.org
Subject: Re: [Mageia-discuss] rpm or deb?
Message-ID: <4C9FCBEC.106 at marneau.eu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Hi, (en FR en-dessous)
My suggestion is a little crazy ...
With the new departure of this distro, perhaps is it a good idea to 
invent a sort of "unified managment" of DEV / RPM.
We start on urpmi, and add to urpmi the abilities to encapsulate apt-get ?
So just easy play " urpmi http://www.skype.com/download/skype.deb" ;-) 
It's auto-manage dependencies and finaly, urpmi launch "apt-get install".
Is it technicaly possible ?
--
Bonjour (in EN up)
Ma suggestion suivante va para?tre d?bile, mais ...
En cr?ant une nouvelle distribution, ce serait peut-?tre une bonne id?e 
d'inventer _enfin_ une sorte de "gestion unifi?e" des paquetages deb et rpm.
L'id?e est d'encapsuler apt-get dans urpmi.
Ainsi, on lance juste urpmi "URL/t?l?chargement/fichier.deb" et ?a g?re 
tout seul les d?pendances.
Est-ce techniquement possible ?

Le 26/09/2010 23:55, Carlos Daniel Ruvalcaba Valenzuela a ?crit :
> I personally found no practical advantage of using apt-get vs urpmi,
> while apt has many nice features urpmi is also solid and works
> perfectly in most common cases, the only problem you may have is with
> malformed packages or with erroneous dependency information, in which
> case the only advantage of apt-get is the fact that Debian takes a lot
> of care of having correct and working packages, which most RPM based
> distros does too (you may get problems with 3th party repos but that
> is another problem).
>
> Being a Mandriva fork we would logically stick with it's tools and
> packaging system.
>
> Regards,
> Carlos Daniel Ruvalcaba Valenzuela
>
> On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Kristoffer Grundstr?m
> <kristoffer.grundstrom1983 at gmail.com>  wrote:
>    
>> Why not create a new format with the best of both worlds (if possible)?
>>
>> .mageia ?
>>
>> Hoyt Duff skrev 2010-09-26 19:44:
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 7:13 AM, RAVI KUMAR BALASUBRAMANIAM
>> <ravikumar17jan at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>> only thing i hate about mandriva is its rpm based packages
>> i prefer apt and deb personally
>>
>>   I can understand a personal preference, but why do you believe that
>> deb is superior to rpm? Given that Mandriva is already rpm-based, what
>> benefit could be derived from abandoning the existing build system and
>> urpmi?
>>
>> > From everything I have read, neither system has a clear advantage over
>> the other, and the end result of using either is essentially the same.
>> I don't believe that changing to a deb-based system would provide any
>> significant benefit to justify the expense in terms of re-training
>> devs and  creating a new build system.
>>
>>
>>      
>    

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 19:01:59 -0400
From: Frank Griffin <ftg at roadrunner.com>
To: Mageia general discussions <mageia-discuss at mageia.org>
Subject: Re: [Mageia-discuss] Mageia's strategy
Message-ID: <4C9FD0E7.8090001 at roadrunner.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

P. Christeas wrote:
> Let me rant in a rather non-polite tone:
> why does *every* Linux distro have to be for Windows users?? Why does every 
> product need to be targeted at stupid people? (obvious answer: there is lots 
> of them)
>
>  
I think you have to separate "looking like Windows" from "implementing
as does Microsoft".  One of the things MS does very well is user
interface design.  What they *don't* do so well is implementation:
everything is done through the GUI, and MS oversimplifies by making
choices silently for the user without giving the user the option to
override.

We're not exactly innocent in this respect either.  MDV tools are
excellent, but they need the closure of a full transparent CLI as well
as a GUI.  Experts and administrators need to be able to provide
configuration through batch scripts.  This is not the case in many
areas.  I do a large number of fresh installs intended to create a new
system configured as an existing system was, and it's really annoying to
boot for the first time and then have to invoke several GUIs to do
things like printer configuration, wireless configuration, and font
installation.

In many areas, we have lost track of the simple fact that a Graphical
User Interface should be just that - an *interface* to a modular and
independent non-graphical module which provides "business logic".  It
should never be the only way to access the business logic.  Hopefully,
free of Mandriva's corporate restrictions, we can achieve that now.

Another issue is choice.  System tools have to provide a range of choice
suitable for both experts and newbies.  While it is acceptable to choose
defaults that will work for newbies out of the box, it is not acceptable
to limit choices for everyone to those defaults.  We've done this on
more than one occasion, the most memorable one being to radically change
and lock down the application menu system and refuse to consider any
configuration options that would deviate from this.

Finally, there is transparency.  MDV tools have in many cases extended
the standard Linux way of doing things in imaginative and useful ways. 
What they don't do is document those ways so that admins and users used
to standard Linux  ways can manually intervene or provide tool
extensions without extensive code reading.  Also, there are many
portions of the toolset, e.g. disk partitioning, network sharing,
setting up VPNs, etc., which involve extremely intrusive and possibly
destructive operations.  All such tools need to have an option, not
necessarily the default, to display to the user a detailed list of
changes that the tool proposes to make, and prompt for approval. 

The problem here is that advanced users and admins get understandably
scared when a tool proposes to do something that involves modifying
multiple critical configuration files or system resources without
providing the details of the changes so that they can be denied if
unwanted, or undone later if so desired.

An even better approach would be to have each configuration tool produce
a program-readable file describing actions it takes, much as RPMs
provide, so that the tool, or some general tool running on another
bootable system with access to the root partition of the affected system
could undo the changes.

I understand why these things were never done in the past. 
Management/marketing (and perhaps even some devs) wanted the
windows-like newbie simplification, and didn't have the resources or the
desire to provide the closure of these features.  I hope that we can
move past this.

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 01:02:35 +0200
From: vfmBOFH <vfmbofh at gmail.com>
To: Mageia general discussions <mageia-discuss at mageia.org>
Subject: Re: [Mageia-discuss] Mageia's strategy
Message-ID:
    <AANLkTimGPtHi0ZUsVAbdYdTC5+F15BXqAasV_tmyTVsp at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

2010/9/26 Sascha Schneider <schneider at zawm.be>
>
> I totally agree to that and I hope Mageia will make this happen.
>
> But I also agree that at this time Mageia has to saddle as a fork,
> structures have to be build, etc.
>
> Plus, we wouldn't use Mandriva if we don't like the way it works. So no
> need to change to deb or make Gnome the primer Desktop Env. or stuff like
> that
>
> My dream would be a very User and Admin friendly Disto
>
> One Installer CD for Desktop Dualarch - metapacks for the desktop env
> One Installer CD for a Serverversion inkl. LXDE + MMC-base and metapaks for
> some spezial apps inkl. the MMC modules (and pulse)
> One Installer CD for a Virtualserver using f.e. OpenVZ and a MMC based
> webui and some community templates
>
> In my opinion with this simple trippelisation you can arrange all kind of
> home, business, school, multimedia, netbook ... structures you ever imagine
> all with one Distro.
>

That's very, very near of my own vision for a "perfect" Linux OS. We have
the big advantage that everything yet still not done. And we count with
tools (delta-rpms, metapackages) to build a core system with "add-ons" (like
server packages, desktop packages...) improving modularity and system
organization.

At the same time, i'm aware that it can be a too big break from the mageia's
origins (in the meaning of system's scheme and organization). So, if we can
progressively drive mageia to this new scheme sounds reasonable too.

Cheers.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
</pipermail/mageia-discuss/attachments/20100927/824696d2/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 03:01:29 +0300
From: paulo ricardo <paulo_ricardogo at hotmail.com>
To: <mageia-discuss at mageia.org>
Subject: [Mageia-discuss] Mageia with Synaptic
Message-ID: <SNT124-W3FBA1BA8C0245C166EC709F650 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

I am not proposing to replace the "URPMI" by the "APT-RPM! I'm proposing we 
change the "Rpmdrake" with "Synaptic" and keeping the "URPMI!
The URPMI is very good, plus the "Rpmdrake" is horrible!

We discuss these things before the programming work to eat. We must define how 
the O.S should be! this discussion is important because the GUI package 
management directly influences the daily work in an OS!

My proposal is that we keep the rpm and urpmi! But substitute Rpmdrake by 
Synaptic, and creating a second interface aimed at users with less knowledge. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
</pipermail/mageia-discuss/attachments/20100927/c7111483/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 02:19:57 +0200 (CEST)
From: Tux99 <tux99-mga at uridium.org>
To: Mageia general discussions <mageia-discuss at mageia.org>
Subject: Re: [Mageia-discuss] rpm or deb?
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.1009270212430.9293-100000 at outpost-priv>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Sun, 26 Sep 2010, Carlos Daniel Ruvalcaba Valenzuela wrote:

> Being a Mandriva fork we would logically stick with it's tools and
> packaging system.

Agreed, if we start questioning everything we might as well all go home.

Mandriva/Mageia are rpm distros and I would expect them to stay like 
that otherwise we could just all use Debian or one of it's derivatives.

urpmi is at least as good as apt-get, if anyone finds that urpmi lacks a 
feature that apt-get has, then please suggest it (not now, later when 
Mageia is set up) so it can be considered to add that feature to urpmi, 
but that's definitely not a reason to abandon urpmi.

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 02:56:24 +0200 (CEST)
From: Tux99 <tux99-mga at uridium.org>
To: Mageia general discussions <mageia-discuss at mageia.org>
Subject: Re: [Mageia-discuss] Mageia with Synaptic
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.1009270248310.9293-100000 at outpost-priv>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Mon, 27 Sep 2010, paulo ricardo wrote:

> 
> I am not proposing to replace the "URPMI" by the "APT-RPM! I'm
> proposing we change the "Rpmdrake" with "Synaptic" and keeping the
> "URPMI! The URPMI is very good, plus the "Rpmdrake" is horrible!

Instead of saying "rpmdrake is horrible", it would be more useful if you 
list what you don't like so it can be improved. No tool is perfect, I'm 
sure Synaptic has flaws to, so just switching to Synaptic only means 
trading one set of flaws for another.

Personally I find rpmdrake works perfectly fine (the startup speed 
could need improving though), it does all I need it to do (and I would 
consider myself an advanced user, since I have 15 years Linux experience 
and work as a sysadmin) and then there are always the urpmi CLI tools as 
alternative.

So lets stop wasting time by talking badly about all those things that 
make Mandriva (and therefore Mageia) the great distro it is, and instead 
lets concentrate on improving (rather than replacing) the tools of 
Madriva/Mageia.

------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 21:17:21 -0400
From: Ireneusz Gierlach <irek.gierlach at gmail.com>
To: Mageia general discussions <mageia-discuss at mageia.org>
Subject: [Mageia-discuss] Mageia Developer Version/Edition?
Message-ID: <4C9FF0A1.6070704 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

  I just thought of this, and I have never seen that done, so I'm not 
sure how it would (if) work exactly.
I was thinking about creating a specific version of the OS that would 
consist of all development tools required to build packages, develop 
components, etc. This would provide the same environment for all 
developers, and help in bug fixing, as they would all have the same 
packages (by default, I was also thinking about implementing a better 
version of Mandriva's Package Stats with an ability to input a list of 
packages [from the bug reporter] so the tester can automatically 
download the same versions). It is just a thought, but I would love to 
see something like this implemented. I want to see what you guys think 
of this too ;) (I'm trying to create something like this but not for OS 
but for a framework, so I want to see some opinions.)

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Mageia-discuss mailing list
Mageia-discuss at mageia.org
https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-discuss

End of Mageia-discuss Digest, Vol 1, Issue 191
**********************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </pipermail/mageia-discuss/attachments/20100927/9c739ed5/attachment-0001.html>