[ale] deb and rpm

[michael d. ivey]

On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 08:26:25AM -0400, Stephen Pellicer wrote:
> I only want some _objective_ differences in the package formats. Looking
> over them they seem very familiar and I am not quite as familiar with
> deb so I wanted to know how it differs from rpm.

IIRC, rpm is cpio based while deb is ar based.

Building rpms requires using a .spec file, which is basically a shell
script.  Building debs requires using a debian/rules file, which is a
Makefile.

For a better breakdown, see
http://www.kitenet.net/~joey/pkg-comp/

Joey is a Debian developer, but he also works on Alien, which converts
between all the different packages.  He ahs tried to keep his comparison
bias-free.

Key differences from his list are:

rpm supports pgp signed packages, deb does not
metadata in deb is accessible by standard tools, rpm is not
deb supports suggests and recommends, as well as requires
debs can include binary files, rpms cannot (is that really true?)

Many of the advantages of debs actually come from Debian policy, not the
package format itself.

HTH.

Disclaimer:  I'm a Debian developer.  I like deb.  And when it comes to
building packages, I much prefer deb to rpm...rpms were a pain to make,
debs are actually kinda fun.

-- 
michael d. ivey        [McQ] : "The thing that bothers me is someone
   <ivey at gweezlebur.com>     : keeps moving my chair."
http://gweezlebur.com/~ivey/ :                                  -- TMBG
 encrypted email preferred   :

 PGP signature