Re: real LSB compliance
Steve Langasek <vorlon@netexpress.net> writes:
> IMHO, we're LSB-compliant if we provide a mechanism for installing and using
> LSB packages. How those packages look once they're done installing is
> somewhat out of scope. ;)
It would be nice if we could uninstall lsb-packages too.
> than just 'rpm -i <file>' -- what happens if someone decides to
> provide an lsb package of emacs that tries to overwrite the .deb?
If people want to use non-native packages of stuff that is an
intergrated part of the distribution they deserve to bleed. Much worse
is it if a lsb-package overwrites a single file belonging to another
package.
(Think windows dll's here. They seems to get overwritten each time you
install something)
Reply to: