Re: Anti-Debian Discruimination (was: DEB vs RPM)
Hamma Scott <scott_hamma@yahoo.com> writes:
> The upshot of the article is:
>
> - We decided that RPM's are the defacto standard
Fact: A limited set subset of RPM v3 is the LSB packaging standard.
No distribution is intended to use these as native packages, only for
LSB packages.
> - DEB's are more reliable, easier to update and
> conform to a stricter policy making them more
> reliable.
>
> - Don't know if RPM's will follow this.
Fact: The entire point of the LSB is to specify, in hideous detail,
precisely what LSB packages may use and depend on, down to the library
and library path level.
It's hard to see how the authors of the article could have read the
LSB at all and still come up with this argument.
--
Alan Shutko <ats@acm.org> - In a variety of flavors!
Got a dictionary? I want to know the meaning of life.
Reply to: