Why some say "rpm hell"

[AP]

On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Beartooth <beartooth at comcast.net> wrote:

>         Say you want Opera on an old machine that you haven't used for
> some time. You go to a browser it does have, but for some reason the
> default opera.com offers isn't what you want. You find what you do want,
> and opera.com asks whether you want the x86 or the 64-wide version.

>         You don't happen to remember which one this machine is, nor an
> easy way to check (like uname -a). So you just download one.

>         Rpm -ivh produces a bramble patch.

>         Being by now an old hand, you notice that all the missing
> dependencies it announces are 64s. So you abort the install, go back to
> opera.com, and get the .rpm for a 32-bit machine. That works, slick as a
> whistle.

>         In this example you have not solved the dependency hell. You have
> dodged it, partly by dumb luck (spotting those 64s), and partly by having
> enough general experience to recognize what they mean.

>         A beginner who had gotten into it might easily've worked
> herself through the brambles into an electronic lake of burning brimstone
> before she hollered for help.

Well, the issues gets generated when an external rpm is installed. But
I guess the most common apps, e.g., Opera and the common apps must be
there in the repos. Only some particular rpms which are not so common
(or required for specific purpose(s)), can possibly create that
problem. But in my view, end users won't use those typical apps which
are not bundled in the DVD!