Re: RPM should be renamed to WTF

Dexter Filmore wrote:

>Why does any company which makes first steps towards linux assume RPM was the
>answer of the Gods?
>
I often have wondered the same thing. It seems to me after years of 
wondering that the most common answer to this is, the way rpms handle 
dependancys. Ironicly this is exactly what I hate about rpm's. Why does 
a source package have to depend on other packages?

>I happily run Slackware, and If I switch one day (because updating SW is a
>hassle) it's gonna be debian for sure - no rpm there either (for Bob's sake!).
>
You should try gentoo. If you like slackware you'd love gentoo.

>Now being the owner of a Radeon board I installed the ATI drivers but had to
>use rpm, so it won't show up in /var/log/packages, where SW stores info about
>installed software. 
>Upgrading those drivers is even more fun.
>Ok, I could rpm2tgz and makepkg a SW package, but why is it up to me? It's not
>like there' only 10 people or so using SW, let alone debian (and -oids like
>Knoppix).
>
>Apart from that I used SuSE.. umm... "used" SuSE for two years and can't say
>that rpm does too great regarding dep tracking. Maybe that's SuSE specific,
>tho.
>
>Dex
>
>
>  
>