Re: PROPOSED: 32/64 bit coexistance
[Massively trimmed the CC list]
>>"mikem" == mikem <email@example.com> writes:
mikem> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>> Previously Oliver Paukstadt wrote:
>> > I think if the package manager could solve our
>> > problem, we should solve the problem in a clean way and not have /lib
>> > pointing to /lib32 or /lib64 depending on an existant compatibility
>> > architecture or not. Great standard. ;-/
>> Horrible standard. And rpm is not the only way to distribute,
mikem> However, it is the Linux Standard Base recommended way of distributing
mikem> software. Whether .deb or tgz is `just as often used' is *highly*
mikem> statistically debatable (e.g., by looking at Netcraft surveys and other
mikem> statistical studies).
I was under the impression that the recommendation was for
(a) the archive file format (i.e., the contents of the .rpm file), and
(b) A specified base level subset of package manager functionality
as embodied by a specific version of rpm?
The significance of the second part is that it allows for the
underlying native package manager to be anything at all, as long as
it provides a compatibility layer. Changing the base line shall
need to be evaluated against the feasibility of implementation on the
various participating distributions.
mikem> Seeing how much of the packaging system debate is not actually based
mikem> around packaging systems, but higher level considerations and tools
mikem> (e.g., APT, up2date, and other tools which aren't packaging systems but
mikem> rather live on top of them), or policies, Linux standards should be
mikem> build upon this previously debated and set packaging standard, and try
mikem> to accommodate deviations as best as it can.
I am given to understand that part of the underpinnings on the
compromise of the packaging standard was it allowed us to present a
simple, easily understood requirements set, without trying to force
the straight jacket of a packaging system on all distributions. This
allowed the LSB to be a pan-linux standard -- an attribute that we
should be loth to loose, I would think.
I would agree with your statement, with the caveat that the
accepted standard was not RPM in general, but a specific version of
RPM, with a frozen feature set.
Against his wishes, a math teacher's classroom was remodeled. Ever
since, he's been talking about the good old dais. His students
planted a small orchard in his honor; the trees all have square
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.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