Jump to content

APT for MDK?

Recommended Posts

Linux_learner, you're comparing apt with rpm.


On rpm based Linux systems, if you want to install a new application that requires other "dependencies" to be installed first, you have to manually install the dependencies yourself.


That's a no-no.


Compare apt with urpmi.


Check some slashdot comments from Ranger / Buchan Milne for instance, he's debunked the superiority of apt quite a few times.


Actually, he even mentioned some advantages of urpmi, though I can't recall what they were (downloading in sets of interdependent rpms and installing those, so doing full dependency resolution on a partial set of requested packages, I think).


Repeat: apt is not better or worse than urpmi. Both beat rpm as a program to install packages.

Don't compare apt with .rpm packages either - not that you're doing that, but lots of people still talk about apt vs .rpm as a package format.


The counterpart of .rpm packages are .deb packages, and the idea that apt is so much better comes from the pre-urpmi / yum / yast times.

Remember that RH has not had an equivalent for urpmi for quite some time. Some people can't get it into their heads that the rpm based distributions have actually also solved the dependency issues for quite some time now.

Those on debian have just not bothered to look back, and keep repeating the same old 'lie' that once was truth.


You are arguing along the same lines by pointing to an article that compares apt with rpm, not with urpmi (or yast, or yum, etc).


Why this is a big deal? Because people who don't know but just repeat that stuff are the ones that keep insisting that it's bad for LSB to have taken rpm as a package standard - and they keep insisting there are dependency resolution problems.


Well, there are, but they are not due to having .rpm (or .deb) as a package standard. They are due to mixing wrong packages, etcetc.

Can you break or mess up your system badly? Sure. With both urpmi or apt, you can break everything, if you don't stick to the rules.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

aye, the other thing is,

comparing apt to rpm is an unfair comparison, because apt is to urpmi as dpkg is to rpm.


apt and urpmi are almost frontends to their system's respective package system.



anyway, to end the debate.


arch's pacman rules all.








Edited by iphitus

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure what you mean by using non MDK packages, you don't have to do that. This is my apt sources list pre- installed. ( thacs mdk version of apt )

As you can see there all MDK rpms so no chance of installing something incompatible.

Thats my question....

If you use pre-existing RPM sources what help is APT?


If you want to add lots of new packages as you might find from rpmfind.net then its no longer strictly mandrake sources and URPMI already does this and sorts out the deps perfectly well ???


I more or less agree with aRTee except apt is better when used on Debian because it integrates with dpkg ... if you are downloading openoffice or firefox this is no big deal... when its ntp-server or apache or phpBB2 then it matters because apt will leave them actually runing!


I don't think this is a big deal for a noobie but for a serious user it is better....


However if you use Mandrake sources and plf then dep problems are about as common as APT, that is about once in a blue moon when servers are in the process of being updated.


I have yet to see if apt4rpm actually does configuration like it does in Debian but i don't see how it can?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Linux_learner, you're comparing apt with rpm.


umm no, i got that right off the apt4rpm site. check it out yourself. they did compare apt to urpmi in the faq's. so no. you are incorrect. i was talking merely about apt and the power of apt compared to urpmi. http://apt4rpm.sourceforge.net/ see the faq's


Are there comparable applications available?

Yes, there are: urpmi from Mandrake. For a nice comparison of all the package mngt systems have a look at the section called "APT and RPM" in the article: "An RPM port of APT". Nice to mention here, is that there is something similar for solaris as well: pkg-get or pkg-utils supporting Solaris, HP-UX, Irix, Tru64, rpm and Aix.




suse doesn't have a real package management system of its own like URPMI or APT hence using apt is a great step forwards. However urpmi does resolve all deps *if* you only use mandrake RPM's.


not sure what you mean here. yast is different from apt or urpmi. in order to add it to yast, you need a file that says this




so to set this up in yast it would be


and for dir on server



yast doesnt use hdlist like mdk.


synaptic is merely the gui to apt. thats it. just like gurpmi is the gui to urpmi. one other thing to compare here, red-carpet/open-carpet. red-carpet/open-carpet is also alot like synaptic, and yes you can add sources to it as you would for synaptic. i have done this, and made red-carpet just as powerfull if not more so, than synaptic.


if i were going to compare anything to rpm, it'd be deb. but since i have never successfully installed debian, then i cant compare. what i can compare is apt to urpmi. i have used urpmi, and i have used apt4rpm. aparently, yall missed what i was saying.


stop and think about this for a sec. how can i compare apt to rpm, when i am on an rpm system and always have been? so obviously i am talking about apt compared to urpmi.


there still is no comparison to apt. it just flat out beats urpmi.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest anon

As i said a few posts back its about having choice, not which one is better.

I have had problems with urpmi in the past although mostly it works fine. Apt has never failed for me but that doesn't mean it won't in the future. A thing i do like about apt is its easy to remove and re-install. Try rpm -e urpmi and you have to remove the gui, rpmdrake and drakconf etc etc. a lot more work involved when it screws up eh?

Personally my favorite is Yum, but there's no MDK version of it.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
There still is no comparison to apt. it just flat out beats urpmi.


erm sure....


how, why?


The extract for YAST doesn't tell me anything.

How does it resolve deps?


This is the real issue.....


The next question, have you ever while using Mandrake had the URPMI sources all set? (properly when the mirrors didn't have a random problem)

I doubt it ...


yast doesnt use hdlist like mdk.


Which is why it doesn't resolve dependencies on repositories.


I use Debian everyday.... My main PC is Debian ... I update apt every night.

When I had Mandrake I used URPMI and kept my mandrake sources up to date.

I honestly only really notice a difference in installing server apps when apt and dpkg configure the server but urmpi leaves it installed but not necassariliy configured...


i.e. install webmin under deb and it configures everything .... hostname, who/where can access etc. then it starts webmin server.

urpmi installs it and then you need to set the name etc. ...


its not a big deal... but I like the apt way...


but since i have never successfully installed debian

If you cant install debian what makes you an expert in apt....

seriously ... what Im explaining is apt outside of Debian is pointless.... or of not pointless about the same as urpmi....


I install fonts..it asks me if I want to configure them using deforma (debian font manager) and then I select them from openoffice... its all done for me...


I am missing what yopu think is so good.... it just seems you read the manual for apt but not for urpmi. No big deal but what else does your earlier post show?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

wrong. yast does resolve deps. yes i did have urpmi set up right. plf and cooker. and i always picked the fastest mirrors available for me. dont prejudge me. i know what i'm doing.


the first time i used apt, i didnt like it much. now that i have done my homework on it (and been using suse since 9.0), i do understand. it is more powerfull.


i can get all my rpms straight from yast. infact, when you do an ftp install, what program is called upon? yast. i use yast to upgrade my entire system. say for example to 9.2. i can set up yast, just like you'd set up gurpmi. infact i have it that way :P


your understanding of yast is lacking.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

linux_learner, just by quoting something from some site (that's actually the site for apt4rpm) doesn't mean you're right in your assumption that apt4rpm or apt itself is better in any way than urpmi. It is not, not by any link or page or site you referred to, and not by any info put forward by people in the know.


Taking your quote:

Are there comparable applications available?

Yes, there are: urpmi from Mandrake. For a nice comparison of all the package mngt systems have a look at the section called "APT and RPM" in the article: "An RPM port of APT". Nice to mention here, is that there is something similar for solaris as well: pkg-get or pkg-utils supporting Solaris, HP-UX, Irix, Tru64, rpm and Aix.

actually tells me they see apt4rpm as an equivalent, not a superior system to urpmi.


So again, apt or apt4rpm are NOT superior to urpmi, not by the wordings of people of the apt4rpm site, nor is anyone else in the know claiming that.


Have a look at a link from the faq of apt4rpm, from that very quote you gave:





Package download

Yes .......Yes..........Yes..........Yes.......................Yes


Depend. resolution

Yes.........No ..........Yes..........Yes(1)...................Yes(1)


Package installation

Yes.........No ..........Yes..........No ........................Yes


Package uninstallation

Yes.........No ..........No ...........No ........................Yes


Package upgrade

Yes.........Yes.........Yes...........Yes ......................Yes


System upgrade

Yes..........No .........Yes...........Yes ......................Yes


Std.http/ftp server(2)

Yes..........Yes.........No ............No........................Yes


Command line interface



Curses based interface

Yes...........No .........No ...........No..........................No


X11 interface

Yes...........No .........Yes..........Yes.........................Yes


Non-inter. operation



Package authent.

Yes(4).......No ...........Yes.........? ...........................Yes


Mirror authent.(3)

Yes(4)........? .............? ............? ...........................?


Upgrade importance(5)

Yes(4)........No ...........? .............Yes ......................Yes


1 Dependency resolution is available up to a fixed/configurable number of passes.

2 Normally, all tools require a special package index file on the server. That file contains information about the available packages, but they are ordinary files downloadable through a modified FTP or HTTP server, allowing easy setup of mirror sites.

3 Package authentication automatically verifies whether the downloaded package is really what the vendor has provided. Mirror authentication verifies whether the contents of a mirror is the same as the contents of the original site.

4 This feature was added to the RPM-enabled version of APT, but has not been ported to the mainstream/official version yet.

5 When a package is being upgraded, show what the update is about. This is useful when the user wants to know whether an update is security-related or just an enhancement.


Sorry, I'm not in the mood to correct the formatting.


All points that urpmi doesn't score well on in this comparison are either wrong or irrelevant; they claim urpmi has no non-interactive mode, but --auto --autoselect is just that (not sure if I got that 100% right, but anyway); that urpmi has or doesn't have a curses interface is not so important, you can use the cli or the gui, whichever you like.


What they don't mention is the point I mentioned before, namely the downloading in sets of installable files, and installing in parts/sets. AFAIK only urpmi does it that way, but then I don't know about apt, just hearsay. I don't know if that's really relevant, but in any case, in terms of features and so on, there's nothing that makes apt superior or inferior to urpmi.


So again, your statement:

apt has alot more options than urpmi. apt is a more powerfull tool.

is nonsense.

apt doesn't have any relevant options that urpmi doesn't have, and it's not a more powerful tool.



The big difference is that urpmi is not advertised as much, and people somehow started believing that apt is the only proper dependency resolution system. And now there are people who use Mandrakelinux who are starting to believe that too, and repeating it... :angry:


[formatted by spinynorman]

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

i say its superior because it has alot more options than urpmi ever did/does. thats my point. it handles rpms just like urpmi as far as the installation. but as far as the tool itself. a ton more options.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

ya know, if yall would quit being so biased, and follow what i'm saying. it'd be simple.


were not talking about how it handles rpms. why? cause rpms are rpms. we are all using an rpm system. what we are talking about is the power of the tool. http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/eggnbacon/docs/urpmi-howto/


http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/apt-howt...n.html#contents (yes i know its a debian site, but the howto still applies)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't give me a list of options like in your first message then claiming that apt is superior.



man urpmi

and related commands (urpmq, urpmf urpme)


and then please tell me what one cannot do with urpmi. Because I'm not seeing anything, and until I do I'll keep insisting that apt is in no way superior to urpmi.


Please note: the urpmi page you point to is a mini howto. Read the real manpage to have the full info, including all options.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

dont rtfm me. try this out.

before asking a question, make sure you have done the following; 1)searched the forum. chances are someone else has already asked and it has been answered. 2) searched google. if you answer no to this question, then its time to hit google. you'll find an overwhelming amount of information from google. 3) news lists. this is similar to the forum, just unregulated. 4) the documentation that comes with your linux distro (man pages, info pages, the html help files, the pdf help files, etc...).


if you answered no to any of those, then stop, and take a look at all those. if you still cant find your answer then ask.


if you need help interperting helps and howto's, ask. if you need help figuring out what search string to use in google, ask.


my sig on suse forums.


i know urpmi. i have not just read the man pages, but read the howto and the mini-howto. i have also read the apt man pages and howtos.


aRTee, you simply misunderstood what i was communicating. you thought i was comparing apt to rpm and i wasnt. i was comparing apt to urpmi, and i still am.


try again ol' boy.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest anon

Posting as anon a user and not anon the admin.

Nothing wrong with a heated debate on this board, and nothing in our guidlines to say you can't say RTFM, but it comes across as a little personal and agressive me thinks.

Any chance we could stop using it?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

gowator: apt provides very little urpmi doesn't, which is why we have never switched to it :). The only thing it has that would be really useful is suggested dependencies, but actually implementing the _mechanism_ for that into urpmi would be trivial, it's writing the dependencies that's a pain.


smart does have some advantages over urpmi (and apt) in terms of how it does dependency calculations. For instance, here's one of its party tricks:


packages A, B and C provide virtual provide D

hundreds of other things depend on D

you have A installed, which is big and messy, so you decide to remove it

urpme A would want to remove the hundreds of things

smart remove A (i don't know the actual command, sorry) would suggest to install the lightest out of B and C in order to keep the D provide intact and allow the other hundreds of packages to remain


sorry if that was unclear :). It has some other 'smart' tricks like that, which is why it's a potential contender.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

linux_learner: to cut all this short, could you please just post a short sample of things you regularly do with apt that you could not do with urpmi?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...