Re: extension of lsb packages
Let me try to answer the last set of questions.
1) the name space issue is with respect to package names (not RPM v3 file
names); therefore, the need to get LANANA online is important.
2) changing the rpm file format to determine if it is an LSB package is a design
issue. I *restarted* the lsb packaging taskforce a year ago. That team was to
outline what could be used among the lsb distributions today (least common
denominator), and they were to produce a comprehensive design for *everyone* to
migrate to for future packaging. Unfortunately resources got tight and the team
stagnated in the proto-type phase. I would welcome anyone that has the time and
expertise to read the logs and notes, then summarize what was designed in the
lsb packaging tasforce; however, I want to avoid enhancements like ".lsb"
without a comprehensive design. There needs to be a full design, proposal, and
acceptance (in the community and lsb) before doing anything like ".lsb".
I hope this helps clarify the "*lsb*" naming issues.