RE: Packaging and installation spec wording
Mr. Youngman,
In addition to Stuart's comments, you are absolutely correct in saying
anything in the LSB is the best. The packaging area is one where tons of
people have brilliant ideas on how to extend it. The key is that what is in
the LSB is something that most people, on most distributions, can actually
use. The more that gets added, the less likely it is that a given package
will simply install.
As big as it is, the LSB spec is really about the minimum size an ABI
specification can be and still be usable. I expect there will be plenty of
opportunities to contribute to follow-on versions.
-----Original Message-----
From: Stuart Anderson [mailto:anderson@metrolink.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 6:03 PM
To: lsb-discuss@lists.linuxbase.org
Subject: Re: Packaging and installation spec wording
On Fri, 18 May 2001, Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
> Just because it's common that doesn't mean its the best. It also stifles
> development - look at all the flame wars in the past. Okay, I'm beating
> my own drum here, but we want an EXTENSIBLE API, not a frozen-in-stone
> program.
We are explicitely not specifying a program. We are specifying the format
of the .rpm file. You can create it using whatever mechanism you wish, and
your distribution should install it using whatever mechanism is available.
Stuart
Stuart R. Anderson anderson@metrolink.com
Metro Link Incorporated South Carolina Office
5807 North Andrews Way 129 Secret Cove Drive
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309 Lexington, SC 29072
voice: 954.660.2500 voice: 803.951.3630
http://www.metrolink.com/ XFree86 Core Team
Creative Applications Lab Chair - SIGGRAPH 2001
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to lsb-discuss-request@lists.linuxbase.org
with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email listmaster@lists.linuxbase.org
Reply to: