Re: lsb-apache rpms
>>"Dan" == Dan Kegel <dank@kegel.com> writes:
Dan> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>
>> >>"Thorsten" == Thorsten Kukuk <kukuk@suse.de> writes:
>>
Thorsten> On Tue, Dec 18, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> >> > Yes, and I think a user should be able to install them with
>> >> > the default tools of the distribution.
>> >>
>> >> Ah, so "dpkg -i lsb-apache-1.3.22-1.i386.rpm" is expected to work?
>>
Thorsten> Don't be kidding. And read again what I wrote. Don't make
Thorsten> the things more complicated than necessary.
>> Pardon me, how exactly is what he said kidding? Is that not
>> what you said? (That the user should be able to install them with the
>> default tools of the distribution -- and guess what, the default
>> tools of my distribution are indeed dpkg).
Dan> Although dpkg could be enhanced to handle lsb packages, why not just do
Dan> apt-get install rpm
Dan> ? That's what I do at work to install the .rpm's that Hard Hat Linux
Dan> consists of (since their install script uses rpm, I can't use alien).
Absolutely. But that entails using tools that are not the
``default tools of the distribution''. If we are already resigned to
tools that are not the ``default tools of the distribution'', why not
remove sources of confusion and call the lsb packages .lsb?
manoj
--
There is no delight the equal of dread. As long as it is somebody
else's. --Clive Barker
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: