Re: Package System specification
>> vendors can say "Our product will run on any LSB 1.x system...", then doesn't
>> that accomplish the goal? Using RPM will lock vendors and end users into
>> it, even if there are third party conversion utilities and so forth.
>Only into the binary package format, which is
>1. a cpio archive of the binaries
> Well we need this anyway
>2. install/remove scripts
> We need these too
>3. Permission data & file types
> Obviously essential
>4. Descriptions/license info
> Clearly importat
>5. Dependancy data
> Necessary for any real setup to protect the users from errors
>6. Cryptographic Signatures
>So I dont see anything in there locking people into the RPM tools or into
>the rpm format. You can put an rpm together without usign rpm . Alien has
>already demonstrated the file format is convertable.
So is the LSB going to have an entry for Alien now? :)
The big problem with relying on a converter is that vendors can't easily
script their installation. Example:
I obtained a copy of Metrowerks CodeWarrior. The parts of CW come as RPM
files. There is an installation script that runs RPM to install the packages.
This failed because I didn't have RPM. I had to manually convert the packages
and install them by hand.
BTW, this was to test CW on Slackware. Not because I was going to use it for
David Cantrell | firstname.lastname@example.org
| Slackware Linux Project