Re: LSB 1.0 as it relates to Debian
On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 01:56:05AM -0600, Matt Taggart wrote:
> I have been working on comparing the LSB 1.0 specification to Debian
> "unstable". I have posted my analysis at,
BTW, the most significant obstacle to Debian supporting the LSB is that
there's no way to see if an implementation actually *works*.
Could someone *please* make some LSB packages that are expected to be
able to install correctly on an LSB compliant system? Say, nethack.lsb and
xbill.lsb? This should be as simple as getting a SuSE install, making an
rpm of nethack/xbill with the bins in /opt instead of /usr, and changing
the extension. Also creating, say, a boa.lsb would demonstrate most
of the packaging fundamentals. And something like tuxracer.lsb would
probably come close to demonstrating all the library requirements.
Anyone? Please?
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
-- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
Reply to: