yum vs. apt

[Axel Thimm]

On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 09:52:16AM -0500, Phil Schaffner wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-11-23 at 09:24 -0500, Mark Bradford wrote:
> > I have been using apt for installs and updating/upgrading, but am 
> > noticing most of the conversation here seems to favor yum.  Is there any 
> > significant difference between the two, or are there any issues or 
> > conflicts in using both?
> 
> FC3 repositories seem to be dropping apt support,

Which ones do such things! ???

> and apt does not handle multi-arch (i386 vs x86_64, PPC, ...).

True :(

> Has been some talk of an apt version able to use the new yum
> repository meta-data, but so far seems to be vaporware.

Also true, but less painful than the (lack of the) multilib support.

> I've pretty much dropped apt in favor of yum, but apt/synaptic still
> seem viable for FC2 and earlier.

It's also available for FC3, as well as yum/yum20 for FC2 and earlier.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20041123/ceb927bc/attachment-0002.bin