[wplug] Package Management

Zach Paine zman at wplug.org
Mon Jun 17 16:45:46 EDT 2002


Well, now that we are completely off topic.  According to WordNet,
agnostic means uncertain of all claims of knowledge.  So in terms of
APT's relationship to a package management system, apt does not need to
know much about the system.  So in this case Mr. DiBiase used the word
correctly.  On the other hand, Webster's 1913 defines agnostic as
"neither affirming or denying the existence of a personal Diety", and
while APT is rumored to have Super-Cow powers, this use of the word
would not make much sense in the original context.  Guess it goes either
way :)

Zach

On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 15:56, Nate Sharadin wrote:
> "APT was designed to be (mostly) package-management-system-agnostic."
> 
> You mean APT doesn't believe that there is proof that 
> package-management-systems can exist or cannot exist?
> 
> Curiously,
> -Nate Sharadin
> nps5 at pitt.edu
> 
> 
> --On Monday, June 17, 2002 11:58 AM -0400 Evan DiBiase <evand at wplug.org> 
> wrote:r
> 
> > On Monday, June 17, 2002, at 11:26  AM, Doug Green wrote:
> >
> >> Hey all- can't you also install apt-get for RedHat? If so, does this
> >> cause any problems, such as messing up the rpm database (ie: does rpm
> >> "see" these packages too?).
> >
> > If you're using APT on RedHat, you're probably using RPM as the package
> > management system (unless you're some sort of masochist). APT was
> > designed to be (mostly) package-management-system-agnostic.
> >
> > -Evan
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > wplug mailing list
> > wplug at wplug.org
> > http://www.wplug.org/mailman/listinfo/wplug
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wplug mailing list
> wplug at wplug.org
> http://www.wplug.org/mailman/listinfo/wplug





More information about the wplug mailing list