RE: Port Name: A Vote

[marc.miller@amd.com]

I agree with the comment made earlier on this list... the LSB is to allow ISVs to develop software they know will install and run on any LSB-standard Linux distribution.  Therefore alien needs to understand how to translate from an x86_64 RPM package to a .deb, but as for the Debian package names, those aren't directly affected by the LSB.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Cameron Patrick [mailto:cameron@patrick.wattle.id.au]
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 4:53 AM
To: debian-amd64@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Port Name: A Vote


Mattias Wadenstein wrote:

| Ok, the relevant passage for the "AMD64 Packaging" LSB Spec:
| 
| "All packages must specify an architecture of x86_64. An LSB runtime
| environment must accept an architecture of x86_64 even if the native
| architecture is different."

I think the whole "LSB says x86_64" is irrelevant from Debian's
perspective.  Just take a look at the LSB "Packaging" spec --

        http://www.linuxbase.org/spec/book/Packaging/Packaging.html#SWINSTALL

        Applications shall either be packaged in the RPM packaging
        format as defined in this specification, or supply an
        installer which is LSB conforming (for example, calls LSB
        commands and utilities). [1]

        Distributions shall provide a mechanism for installing
        applications in this packaging format with some restrictions
        listed below. [2]

        [...]

        [2] The distribution itself may use a different packaging
        format for its own packages, and of course it may use any
        available mechanism for installing the LSB-conformant
        packages.

So I think that if you take the AMD64 Packaging spec in context, it's
saying that we have to be able to install /RPMs/ with an arch of
x86_64, not that the Debian architecture has to be x86_64.

Cameron.