Re: LSB

[Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>]

Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > No way that rpm replaces dpkg; dpkg is doing a far better job in defining
> > dependencies, which is IMHO the first and most important job of a package
> > management system.
> 
> That's actually not true. dpkg and rpm do not define dependencies, they
> allow packages to specify them.

That's not strictly true. Rpm does not (last I checked) allow
dependancies of the form: foo | bar | baz. No boolean OR.

It might be possible to shoehorn such a thing into the metadata field
rpm uses for dependancies, but the package manager would think you were
on drugs.

-- 
see shy jo