[CentOS] Why is yum not liked by some?

Oliver Falk oliver at linux-kernel.at
Mon Sep 5 15:40:07 UTC 2005

On 09/05/2005 04:58 PM, Todd Cary wrote:
> I have seen messages posted on the Fedora oriented forums that imply 
> that "yum" is  antiquated.  Not being a Linux guru, I do not have the 
> experience to make a thorough evaluation, but so far it has been just 
> great.

First of all: You shall not believe everything that you read. :-)

Yum, is one of the youngest players in the rpm update world. Yum has 
been (re-)written by Seth Vidal.

Project page: http://linux.duke.edu/projects/yum/

Nothing more to say, if you read the project page. Yum is still under 
active development by Seth and friends; So antiquated is not correct!

What is antiquated in some way is up2date. It's still used by RH and 
there are good reasons for 'em to use it...

What is also antiquated in some way is apt. But my recommandation 
against apt comes from technical view: apt wasn't meant to play with 
rpm, even if it seems to work fine.


yum is currently the best tool for Fedora, CentOS, AlphaLinux, etc. 
because it's easy to use, it's easy to build own repositories and there 
are MANY yum-repositories out there allready... And yum knows how to 
play well with rpm...


More information about the CentOS mailing list