Re: Package System specification

[Jeffrey Watts <watts@jayhawks.net>]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2000, David Cantrell wrote:

> Instead, why doesn't the LSB actually make a specification that all
> distributions can comply with without losing their unique qualities.  
> As it stands right now, I see the LSB becoming a Red Hat-based
> distribution cookie cutter.  It think that's going too far for a
> specification.

David, go to the archives for the answers to this.  This is a very old
argument and it should be "Hitlered" right now.  Going this route is
trolling for flames.  Don't mean to dismiss you, but most of us don't have
the time (or desire) to answer your arguments.  They've been answered many
times in the past.  Also, I believe this should probably be moved to
lsb-discuss, but I'm not going to CC it because I'm hoping that it will
die here.

Thanks,
Jeffrey.

o-----------------------------------o
| Jeffrey Watts                     |
| watts@jayhawks.net         o-----------------------------------------o
| Systems Programmer         | "If somebody doesn't flush a toilet     |
| Network Systems Management |  around here, I get an email from       |
| Sprint Communications      |  Kansas about it."                      |
o----------------------------|  -- Steve Jobs                          |
                             |  On customer complaints                 |
                             o-----------------------------------------o