So what's wrong with RPM?


Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: So what's wrong with RPM?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Binghamton NY
    Posts
    2,435

    So what's wrong with RPM?

    People feel really strongly about RPM being bad, and I'm not clear on exactly why. I've been using mostly an RPM-based distro for a couple of years without any problems*, but to be fair I don't often do a lot of updating, so maybe that's why I haven't been seeing that. Really let's have some specifics. Is there a problem with Redhat Package Management, and if so what?

    *One big exception: SUSE 10.1 before the remastered version was released late last year.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    763
    I think a lot of the negative views about rpm come from the days when you didn't have any sort of dependency resolution. You had to just install the rpm yourself and then when it complained that it was missing dependencies, you had to track those down and install your self, and when those complained, you had too.....etc...etc....etc...

    These days you don't really have to worry about things like that, but many people for some reason still like to complain about it and bad mouth rpm. RPM could be very useful and very friendly if you use a proper package manager(see YUM, YAST, Synaptic, APT4RPM, SMART) with them and if you use properly created rpm's. The rpm database can be very useful when it comes to keeping track of all the software on your system and their dependencies. I for one never really had any real problems with rpms.(except currently struggling to build one ) I also never really had any problems with dpkg's for that matter.
    Basically....use what ever you feel comfortable with.

    Side Note:
    Is there a problem with Redhat Package Management, and if so what?
    I don't think its called the Redhat Package Manager any more. I think its RPM Package Manager now.
    Check out the Unix/Linux Administration Program at Seneca College.
    Thanx to everyone that helped/helps me on this forum!

    t0mmyw on #linuxn00b

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    681
    that is why i hated them because back when i was learning linux on redhat 5.0 you had many decencies problems which caused alot of headaches.
    "Software is like sex: it's better when its free."
    -LINUS TORVALDS

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    98
    Let me count the ways... Actually, my RPM mis-experiences were back in RH-7/9 days so the utility may be far better now.

    Being a fairly new Linux newbie back then (say, a year or so of experience), I would download an rpm file and do the install. But most of the time it would fail on a missing dependency. Then I would hunt up the missing stuff, and THEY would fail on missing dependencies. And so forth... So, for a small utility that would have taken 30 seconds in Windows, I might spend several nights on. A slow dialup line didn't help.

    On the positive side, I learned a ton of stuff while trying to work my way through the installs.

    Then there were just the unfixable problems (for a newbie) such as...
    "That RPM cannot be installed because it is already installed." followed by "That RPM cannot be uninstalled because it is not installed." Ok, maybe I don't need that program after all. And also the occasional problem that the RPM was reported installed successfully, but no trace of it could be found by me, grep or locate.

    Finally just started getting source and doing the ./configure make make install routine.

    But RH-9 was a very slick distro and I really liked it - used it for over a year until RH abandoned that segment of the market. Almost everything on the install CDs worked out of the box.

    When I switched to Debian, it didn't work any better than RH and the install was much more of a pain, but I was blown away by aptitude which was about 56 times better than RPM (conservatively speaking)..

    Konan

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,012
    There is nothing in of itself that is wrong with RPM. Any troubles I have had with dependencies and most any other issue, has invariably been due to the person that built the RPM. When a package maintainer forgets to include a symlink or specifies the wrong version number of something or whatever the specs for that package management system calls for. It doesn't matter if it's a deb, RPM or anything else.... it'll barf in one way or another.

    What I will acknowledge is the package maintainers of the non-RPM type seem to be more fastidious in ensuring the person who builds the package is done properly.
    You can tuna piano, but you can't tune a fish.

    http://www.lunar-linux.org/
    It's worth the spin.

    http://www.pclinuxos.com/page.php?7
    Puts the rest to shame.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Binghamton NY
    Posts
    2,435
    I used to use Red Hat 9, and I remember hunting down rpms one by one, and it was indeed pretty awful but these days, nearly everything I need is in my YAST online repositories. I have to download certain proprietary packages (e.g., Vmware server) but proprietary stuff is always self-enclosed. I open the package in Konqueror, and YAST takes over the installation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Konan
    Then there were just the unfixable problems (for a newbie) such as...
    "That RPM cannot be installed because it is already installed." followed by "That RPM cannot be uninstalled because it is not installed." Ok, maybe I don't need that program after all. And also the occasional problem that the RPM was reported installed successfully, but no trace of it could be found by me, grep or locate.

    Konan
    One great thing about SUSE is that YAST gives you options in situations like this. You're informed of the situation, but there's always a box to check for "install it anyway!".
    Last edited by blackbelt_jones; 04-02-2007 at 07:00 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,012
    Quote Originally Posted by blackbelt_jones
    I used to use Red Hat 9, and I remember hunting down rpms one by one, and it was indeed pretty awful but these days, nearly everything I need is in my YAST online repositories. I have to download certain proprietary packages (e.g., Vmware server) but proprietary stuff is always self-enclosed. I open the package in Konqueror, and YAST takes over the installation.
    Ok, well now your talking about repositories which in my view is a totally separate issue from a package management tool.
    You can tuna piano, but you can't tune a fish.

    http://www.lunar-linux.org/
    It's worth the spin.

    http://www.pclinuxos.com/page.php?7
    Puts the rest to shame.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    285
    "nearly everything I need is in my YAST online repositories." This is the key to living in rpm heaven as opposed to hell. Search until you find the rpm package ment specifically for your distro and you avoid problems. Also withen a distro rpms for different versions may not be compatible. Example what works for suse 9.3 may not be compatible with 10.2.

    ed

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Binghamton NY
    Posts
    2,435
    Quote Originally Posted by stumbles
    Ok, well now your talking about repositories which in my view is a totally separate issue from a package management tool.



    The repository means that I have nearly everything I need, dependancies included, all within easy reach of YAST, and it's all preconfigured for the current version of my distro, and reccomended by opensuse.org. The repositories are what was missing from RPM in the bad old days. Once you've got them set up, package management with YAST (or YUM or URPMI) becomes as easy as running apt-get or synaptic.
    Last edited by blackbelt_jones; 04-02-2007 at 11:15 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    México
    Posts
    335
    Quote Originally Posted by blackbelt_jones
    People feel really strongly about RPM being bad, and I'm not clear on exactly why. I've been using mostly an RPM-based distro for a couple of years without any problems*, but to be fair I don't often do a lot of updating, so maybe that's why I haven't been seeing that. Really let's have some specifics. Is there a problem with Redhat Package Management, and if so what?

    *One big exception: SUSE 10.1 before the remastered version was released late last year.
    For just one reason:

    You forget the old:

    Code:
    [$] ./configure && make && sudo make install
    And because nowadays using RPMs are for n00bs.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,012
    Quote Originally Posted by blackbelt_jones


    The repository means that I have nearly everything I need, dependancies included, all within easy reach of YAST, and it's all preconfigured for the current version of my distro, and reccomended by opensuse.org. The repositories are what was missing from RPM in the bad old days. Once you've got them set up, package management with YAST (or YUM or URPMI) becomes as easy as running apt-get or synaptic.
    Yes I know what a repository means and back then they were not exactly um, coherent and did make things more difficult than they should have been. And back then installing Redhat 5.whatever + gnome took a fair amount of determination and resolve.

    I was using Mandriva when it was Mandrake and got to like their urpmi. It worked very well. But the ride was not bump free. Again as I mentioned the real problem was not urpmi itself it was the following things;

    1. They would change mirrors and not tell anyone.
    2. The mirrors were very slow at updating.
    3. The people who constructed the rpms could have been a bit more observant of the packaging specs.

    Are any of those due to some deficiency of urpmi? No, not that I can see. Are any of those directly attributed to the people? Ya. It's certainly not, in this example, urpmi's fault that a repository had moved, or that someone screwed up building the rpm. During those times Mandrake had their **** together, urpmi was/is a very capable package management system.

    But this thread is about things back then and yeah they were pretty crappy.

    The reality of it is I have seen no comments or rational that supports the notion that one package manager is superior to another. I've used a number of package managers and they all have had their bumps. I think what it really boils down to is the people behind the scenes that assemble all this stuff and their attention to detail.
    You can tuna piano, but you can't tune a fish.

    http://www.lunar-linux.org/
    It's worth the spin.

    http://www.pclinuxos.com/page.php?7
    Puts the rest to shame.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Binghamton NY
    Posts
    2,435
    I think the answer is that RPM is not the whole solution to package management. I can remember way way way back when I was using Debian Woody. I didn't know anything about apt-get, and so I would download and install .deb packages, and the dependancies, and my experience is that without apt-get to manage dependancies, .deb packages are no more fun than .rpm packages. So with RPMs, you're going to need Yum, or Urpmi, or Yast, and you're going to need those repositories... after that, it's (almost) all good.

    For newbies, apt-get has the advantage of coming either configured, or very close to configured. There are resources on the web that make bringing together the necessary repositores for RPM distros pretty easy, but you have to know where to find them. There used to be a website called "The Unoffical Fedora FAQ" that had a neat script which would completely set up a whole slew of repositores for YUM. (Last time I looked, the site was still there, but it hadn't been updated for the latest version of Fedora.) Or there's this essential page of links at opensuse.org.

    These are great resources, but when I first came around I didn't even know how to ask the questions that would have led me to them, and that led to a lot of stumbling around. For a long time, I was crazy for Debian Sarge, and it was for no other reason that when I installed Sarge from the installer disk, apt-get was all set up and ready to go. (Sadly, Etch doesn't have that advantage! When you install etch from the installer disk, you need to edit the /etc/apt/sources.list file in order to install off the net, and if you try it'll prompt you for the CD.)

    I asked this question because I wondered if there was some reason why RPM should make me hesitate before recommending SUSE to newbies, and I don't think there is, provided that I also tell them about the page of links at opensuse.org, and how to use them.
    Last edited by blackbelt_jones; 04-03-2007 at 11:35 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •