Re: APT v. YUM -- understanding the technology

["Bryan J. Smith" <b.j.smith@ieee.org>]

On Mon, 2004-11-22 at 02:23, Casey Boone wrote:
> been using yum as i want to know it before having to be tech support
> for it (i will be installing 64bit fc3 on his box and my understanding
> is apt doesnt quite support it to the level yum does in that apt
> doesnt like 64 and 32bit versions of the same library installed at the
> same time or somesuch)
> i miss apt, let me tell you.

I wondered if lib v. lib64 was handled well by the RPM back-end itself,
let alone whether or not the YUM-RPM or APT-RPM front-ends did.

I really could use a x86-64 platform for some extensive testing (as well
as benchmarking).  So far, all x86-64 platforms I have deployed have
been with IA-32 software.

-- 
Bryan J. Smith                                    b.j.smith@ieee.org 
-------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Subtotal Cost of Ownership (SCO) for Windows being less than Linux
Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) assumes experts for the former, costly
retraining for the latter, omitted "software assurance" costs in 
compatible desktop OS/apps for the former, no free/legacy reuse for
latter, and no basic security, patch or downtime comparison at all.



-
To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo@silug.org with
"unsubscribe silug-discuss" in the body.