After getting into an argument with one of the yum developers some time ago, I did sit down and attempt to benchmark apt vs yum, but it's impossible to do this. Fedora and Debian are completely different distros, so benchmarking two package installs isn't fair -- the package you are installing might be configured completely differently or have more dependencies on one distro than the other, so it's just not a fair test.
Nevertheless, yum does feel slower, and anyone who uses both daily like I do would tend to agree.
Does Portage do full dependency resolution? That's what kills package managers (see my posting above yours).
I don't see why HN has to switch to feelings all of a sudden, just for this article. Benchmarks are what count.
> so it's just not a fair test.
There are statistical methods for counteracting that, but I don't see the point. It would be non-impossible to construct a test where you tested the overhead of the package management system.
After getting into an argument with one of the yum developers some time ago, I did sit down and attempt to benchmark apt vs yum, but it's impossible to do this. Fedora and Debian are completely different distros, so benchmarking two package installs isn't fair -- the package you are installing might be configured completely differently or have more dependencies on one distro than the other, so it's just not a fair test.
Nevertheless, yum does feel slower, and anyone who uses both daily like I do would tend to agree.
Does Portage do full dependency resolution? That's what kills package managers (see my posting above yours).