And, as one who's been following the LSB on lsb-discuss, it looks like
the LSB requirement will be to handle RPM formats, although the method
is not specified (i.e. using rpm or alien to convert debs).
jeff smith
Benjamin Scott wrote:
>
> On Sun, 26 Mar 2000, Randy Edwards wrote:
> > In terms of sheer number of software packages, the ~4500 packages of
> > Debian's soon-to-be-released "potato" version dwarfs the size of Red Hat.
>
> I believe Red Hat has stated that they want to keep their base distribution
> small enough to fit on a single CD. That places an upper limit on the number
> of packages they can include in it. If you want more, their "Deluxe" and
> "Power Tools" distributions includes a few more CDs full of packages.
>
> > In some ways (competition of features) I see the *.rpm and *.deb contest
> > as a benefit, but for 3rd party software developers, the non-standard
> > package format is a nightmare.
>
> In typical hackerish fashion, that problem is being solved by programs such
> as "alien" (that's the example I know, others exist) which allow you to either
> convert between package formats and/or build packages in multiple formats from
> a single spec file.
>
> > We really need the LSB to evolve into something rock solid and a common
> > package format would be a nice bonus for 3rd party commercial developers.
>
> Yes, but at the same, it runs contrary to the freedom of choice that
> embodies much of the Linux community. One way or the other, some group is
> going to be unhappy. But I generally agree that picking a standard would be a
> good idea. Nobody can force you to use it.
>
> > Unfortunately, there's a couple of ideologies behind the package formats.
> > IMHO (from a Debian viewpoint) Red Hat's package format is a bit looser
> > while Debian -- at least for official developers -- maintains a militant
> > attitude that package maintainers can and cannot do certain things. I
> > don't see any merging of package formats any time soon on the horizon.
>
> I think this might be political more then technical. In other words, Red
> Hat chooses to encourage a more relaxed attitude around RPMs, while Debian
> tries to make sure things are Being Done Right. This mirrors the over-all
> attitude of the Red Hat and Debian groups, I think.
>
> --
> Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | Why do we call them apartments if they are together? |
> | Why do we call them buildings if they are already built? |
>
> **********************************************************
> To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
> *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
> unsubscribe gnhlug
> **********************************************************
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
