|This has been thrown around by a few of the guys here for a while, but what are the *real* differences between debs and rpms? They both basically do the same thing, have pretty much the same options and switches, yet create a rift in the linux community between the debian based distros and the rpm based distros.
Is the difference really that big, or is it mostly a religious preference? I know that on the backend they both work off a different database system, and the formats are different, but how hard would it be to make a redhat system work via dpkg/apt? Could it be done? On the flipside, could a debian system be made to work with rpms (I’m talking natively, not via alien).
Something that seems would be advantagous of the linux community would be a common packaging format. .deb has some advantages, and .rpm has some. Both camps can put efforts into creating feature compatibility between the two (signed packages, encryption, etc etc), but that may be wasted effort when both camps could work towards making the distro work with ONE of the two formats.