On 23/09/14 16:03, Mark Rogers wrote:
Am I right to trust .deb more than .rpm? Should I give (eg) Fedora another chance?
Incidentally I also found package management faster with .deb (eg apt-get update vs yum update, apt-get install vs yum install). Stable beats speed but .deb seemed to give me both.
On 23 September 2014 16:44, Laurie Brown laurie@brownowl.com wrote:
They are ok as long as you don't deviate from the norm. In my experience, they are vulnerable to catastrophic library and dependency problems if you deviate from the "approved" packages, and especially is you compile something from scratch.
Sadly, most contract assignments specify RH/Fedora or CentOS
My employer has their own .rpm disto, which is therefore the preferred platform for their products (at least on x86), and so I do a lot of work with it (<disclaimer>all views here strictly personal!</disclaimer>).
As Laurie says, if you stick to the straight and narrow then .rpm systems are fine.
However, I still prefer to use Debian where possible (at work), and pretty much exclusively at home. Every six months or so I go on a "distro walk", flirt with something else, get hacked off and then come back to Debian.
Cheers,
Ewan