[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: LSB Compliance

On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 04:43:45PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Asad Quraishi wrote:

> As Roland said, Debian sid (unstable) should be compliant, maybe testing
> as well.

To be fair, the description for the lsb package in unstable says:

  "The intent of this package is to provide a best current practice way
   of installing and running LSB packages on Debian GNU/Linux.  Its
   presence does not imply that we believe that Debian fully complies
   with the Linux Standard Base, and should not be construed as a
   statement that Debian is LSB-compliant."

And, in fact, last I checked, we were FHS-compatible, but not fully
FHS-compliant (we need to finish getting rid of /usr/doc), and since
the LSB includes the FHS, that may well mean that we're not strictly
LSB-compliant either.  We might be LSB-compatible though (if the LSB
defines such a category).  The appropriate person to ask for more
details might be the maintainer of the lsb package.

Chris Waters           |  Pneumonoultra-        osis is too long
xtifr@debian.org       |  microscopicsilico-    to fit into a single
or xtifr@speakeasy.net |  volcaniconi-          standalone haiku

Reply to: