Re: Re: LSB bastards
On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 11:44:19PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Sun, 1 Jul 2001 12:03:30 -0400, Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net> wrote:
> >
> > Debian has a decision to freely make: Are we interested in allowing
> > users to install a 'lsb' package which makes their debian system lsb
> > compliant.
>
> yes but it seems RPM's are now defined by the LSB as "standard" so dpkg
> will remain outside standards now. that scares me.
Hello?
"standard" for commercial application, not like: "you're not leet
anymore, rpm is standard now"
> even RPM-based dists include alien, no problem for them since they don't allow
> users to "dpkg -i foo.deb" like we may be going to do with RPM.
Why should we allow _users_ to install RPMs anyway?
> > Any rpm != any lsb package. Sigh. Do some research before flaming?
>
> Does it matter? once a Debian system is able to install any lsb-compliant RPM package,
> lesser developers will be disposed to create a dpkg package, which is only for Debian,
> and dedicate efforts in RPM packaging. That, in a long term, brings Debian to become
> another RPM-based distro.
Why would a DD start packaging stuff in .rpm format?
Did you read the thread at all? You won't be using Debian anymore before
you can install lsb-compliant packages with the same success as .deb.
get real.
> keep in mind that legitimate fascism comparisons do exist.
legitimate "other" comparisons do seem appropriate in your case, too.
Who's the troll?
Michael, not bothering to even start getting angry about your two other
posts.
Reply to: