Re: Was the release of Debian 2.0 put on Linux Announce?
On Tue, 4 Aug 1998, Ed Cogburn wrote:
> > In what ways is Debian non-standard? We have the FSSTND, and soon FHS.
> > Any vendor can install into /usr/local (and soon /opt) on a Debian
> > system with the guarantee that we won't munge their stuff! How many
> > other Linux distros can say that?
> Its going to take more than declaring /usr/local off limits to solve
> the problem of inter-distribution operability. There's the problems
> with shared libs (versions/locations), and different package management
> systems. And no, 'alien' is not a safe and complete solution (subtle
> errors can still happen); this is pointed out in the LSB forum on
> freshmeat. These are the problems that LSB appears to be aimed at. I
> just hope that the LSB 'process' doesn't end up trying to ram RPM down
> everyone's throat.
This is my main worry though I could ALMOST accept that if there was a
text-based package manager with dependancy checking at select time for RPM
but there isnt. If LSB mandates RPM I will oppose it.
> I'll agree here. LSB is still in an 'alpha' state (at best), so there
> shouldn't be a reason for all of us getting so worked up over this
> issue, here and now. :-)
Microsoft! Which end of the stick do you want today?
Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe email@example.com < /dev/null