View Single Post
Posts: 3,319 | Thanked: 5,610 times | Joined on Aug 2008 @ Finland
#220
For all intents and purposes the two formats (can) provide the same level of functionality. While this wasn't communicated well, RPM wasn't chosen, it is a consequence of other choices (OBS and others hinted, probably more clear after the MeeGo - or Harmattan - SDK is released).


Originally Posted by zimon View Post
I see the problem is Debian, which still stubbornly use deb-package format, although in LSB it was agreed RPM is the package format used in LSB compliant systems.
Let's get a few facts straight.

The standard does not dictate what package format the software system must use for its own packages, merely that RPM must be supported to allow packages from third-party distributors to be installed on a conforming system.

Debian has been using strong crypto to validate downloaded packages. This is commonly called "secure apt" (or "apt-secure") and was implemented in Apt version 0.6 in 2003, which Debian migrated to in 2005.

Now, stop the format bickering, it's pointless.
__________________
Blogging about mobile linux - The Penguin Moves!
Maintainer of PyQt (see introduction and docs), AppWatch, QuickBrownFox, etc
 

The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to attila77 For This Useful Post: