[Mageia-discuss] Package management system

[Lirodon]

Doesn't packagekit provide Gnome and KDE-native interfaces for package
management?

Shawn

On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Richard <richard.j.walker at ntlworld.com>wrote:

> On Tuesday 28 September 2010 23:42:21 Renaud MICHEL wrote:
> > No, if you are talking about rpmdrake, you should compare it to synaptic.
> > I you want to talk about apt (be it apt-get or aptitude), you should
> > compare it to urpmi, and urpmi (in my opinion) is not slow.
> >
> Agreed. Though I am not by any means a command line junkie I will always
> use
> uprmi when I know exactly what I want.
>
> So it is synaptic/apt and rpmdrake/urpmi. No doubt yum has a GUI
> counterpart
> too.
> >
> > emerge and macports are source-based "packet" managers.
> > As the programs are compiled when you want to install them, you can
> decide
> > to exclude some optional, compile-time functionality, and avoid their
> > dependencies.
> >
> > In pre-compiled packets (like rpm or deb), the packager decided what
> should
> > be compiled, and so what are the required dependencies.
> > You still have the option to get the source package and tweak it (via the
> > spec file for rpm, or rule for deb) to exclude some things you don't
> > require. (but you will need to do it again each time an update is
> > available)
> >
> Right, I have done this with a custom ffmpeg build. Compile time dependency
> control is, of course, a grace and favour benefit provided by the program
> author. I get the impression that a packager can introduce depencies when
> special support is needed for extra features he may choose to include. This
> seems to be what happened with the 2010.1 issue of the foobillard rpm where
> a
> new dependency on Pulse has been created which does not exist in the 2010.0
> package or the author's source.
> >
> > Packages have dependencies, those are interpreted as "this package cannot
> > work without those".
> > You can also have less strict recommendations, deb has provided for long
> > recommended packages (not really required, but a must have) and suggested
> > packages (is an interesting addition, but nothing essential).
> > Rpm also provide such a mechanism (though I think is younger than deb)
> with
> > the suggested packages.
> > Urpmi take the suggested packages into account, when installing it will
> by
> > default selected also the suggested packages, but you can add the --no-
> > suggests option to avoid this.
> Does this mean that I can find the KDE packages which "depend" on Pulse and
> re-package them such that Pulse is only "recommended"? If so then I will
> have
> to find the way to set the --no-suggests option in rpmdrake. I hadn't even
> looked for it before as I have only recently started to discover problems
> in
> Mandriva packages.
> > On the urpme side, if you uninstall a package that was installed as a
> > suggestion, it won't trigger the uninstallation of the package that
> > suggested it.
> Something similar seems to apply to packages which I inadvertently "mark"
> as
> manually installed. urpme reports that such packages will be excluded from
> orphan detection. I love the --auto-orphans switch.
>
> Richard
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </pipermail/mageia-discuss/attachments/20100928/1234722a/attachment.html>