Re: LSB Compliance + DEB vs. RPM
On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 02:08:08AM +0200, Jiri Klouda wrote:
> I was reading carefully all the thread about .rpm in LSB
> standard and I think there might be a solution to this.
> We can add to .deb packages something like 'Provides-RPM:'
> and there list all the names of equivalent RPM packages
> from all different distributions, which functionality is
> provided by this package. Then we could use this header
> to build a respective RPM databases. Thus if someone
> installs RPM package, it will not break the system entirely.
This is unneccesary, since LSB packages are only allowed to depend on
'lsb' and other LSB packages.
> Also if we would install a new .deb package that 'Provides-RPM'
> some already installed RPM package, we could offer the user
> the option to remove this RPM to clear (debianize) the
> distribution.
This situation would never arise. LSB packages that we aren't allowed to
distribute would never have a corresponding .deb. LSB packages that we
ARE allowed to distribute are irrelevant because higher quality packages
would already exist in the archive.
Not to mention that maintaining "Provides-RPM" lines would be an
administrative nightmare.
Joshua
--
Joshua Haberman <joshua@haberman.com>
Reply to: