Re: Linux Core Consortium
On Wed, Dec 15, 2004 at 12:51:21PM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2004 at 04:04:22PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > It seems to me than one of the main value of Debian is in the quality of
> > its core distribution. One of the reason of the quality is that it
> > is not developed for itself but as a platform for the 10^4+ packages
> > and the 10+ architectures in Debian. For example the compiler must be
> > ...
> > Given that, an attempt to develop the core distribution as a separate
> > entity is going to be impractical and to reduce its quality.
> Why? In fact you are proving your own argument wrong.
[Please avoid resorting to such statement. It is worthless and can only
irritate the person you reply to. Thanks.]
> distribution is developed as a core of more, let alone all, Linux
> distributions including Debian, the amount of packages using it as
> platform will certainly increase.
My fear is that a core distribution developed as a core will only be
tested against itself and not against all the other packages in Debian.
> > On the other hand, nothing bars the LCC to build a distribution on top of
> > Debian. There is a lot of precedent for doing so (Xandros,libranet,
> > lycoris, linspire, mepis, etc.).
> This is one argument why I'd say, we surely should work with LCC.
IIUC, the LCC is not about creating a source distribution and using it
as a base for several distros, but to bless some binary build in a way
that make inconvenient to use another build because you then lose the
certification. This means Debian will have the choice between fixing
bugs or keeping the certification but not both.
> > As a practical matter, what if the Debian gcc team decide to release
> > etch with gcc 3.3 because 3.4 break ABI on some platforms and gcc-4.x is
> > not stable enough on all the platforms ? Will LCC follow ? If not, how
> > are we going to share binary package if we do not use the same compiler?
> Another reason why we should work together as the problem will arise
> with the other dists anyway.
Could you elaborate ?
if that matters, I meant 'share binary package' in the sense of sharing
the LCC binary packages, not sharing 3th-party packages.
Imagine a large red swirl here.