Re: LSB version for etch
Andreas Barth writes...
> I think we should start to discuss which LSB version we want to have as
> basis for etch soon.
I don't know of any reason why it can't be LSB 3.0 (spec release this week).
It does require a newer glibc than sarge and some of the X tests might require
Xorg to pass, but those are both goals for etch right? I'll be running the 3.0
tests on etch soon.
> about LSB, you can of course lead that discussion if you want. In any
> case, we would be thankful for your input on this matter, especially on
> a list of differences between LSB 1.3 (which is still the standard in
> Debian), and the best-match for etch in your opinion.
I think we might even been 2.0 compliant in sarge, but we're still testing
> Feel free to start a public discussion by posting these information
> directly to debian-devel, or to hand them over to the release team or to
> me, so that we can start a public discussion, or in anything else as you
> consider it fit.
Ok, good idea, I'll bring the subject up on debian-lsb and maybe send a
pointer or summary to debian-devel for those not on debian-lsb.
> If there is anything else from your side on that matter, please don't
> hesitate to tell us.
How do you feel about multi-arch?
How do you feel about support for alternate (ie non-sysv) init systems?