Re: What should go into "How Software Producers can distribute their products directly in .deb format"?

To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: What should go into "How Software Producers can distribute their products directly in .deb format"?
From: Tollef Fog Heen <tollef@add.no>
Date: 09 Dec 2002 13:08:52 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] 87bs3v8kdn.fsf@yiwaz.raw.no>
Mail-followup-to: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 200212081806.41515.shalehperry@attbi.com>
References: <[🔎] 87ptsci4hp.fsf@zarathustra.isotton.com> <[🔎] 200212081806.41515.shalehperry@attbi.com>

* Sean 'Shaleh' Perry 

| In the end it makes very little sense for a3rd party to provide
| debs.  The LSB requires rpm support only.  Personally I would be
| happy if they released a rpm for compliance and a tarball (binary or
| source as they wish) for everyone else.

I disagree with this, I find it great that, say, Opera provides
policy-compliant aptable Debian packages.

-- 
Tollef Fog Heen                                                        ,''`.
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are      : :' :
                                                                      `. `' 
                                                                        `-

Reply to:

References:
- What should go into "How Software Producers can distribute their products directly in .deb format"?
  - From: Aaron Isotton <aaron@isotton.com>
- Re: What should go into "How Software Producers can distribute their products directly in .deb format"?
  - From: Sean 'Shaleh' Perry <shalehperry@attbi.com>

Prev by Date: Re: [Testing] Why isn't a52dec updating
Next by Date: Re: What should go into "How Software Producers can distribute their products directly in .deb format"?
Previous by thread: Re: What should go into "How Software Producers can distribute their products directly in .deb format"?
Next by thread: Re: What should go into "How Software Producers can distribute their products directly in .deb format"?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread