also sprach Tom Arnold t0m4rn...@gmail.com [2009.11.29.1230 +0100]:
I know there have been many attempts and I think it is kind of sad
that RH, Novell and Debian can't agree on something LSB-based.
Serving users is never wrong and it would certainly make the pie
bigger for everybody.
But
also sprach Eugene Gorodinsky e.gorodin...@gmail.com [2009.11.29.1948 +0100]:
Not really. It's possible to standardise just on shared libraries for
example. Providing the software is self-contained, it will be able to
work on compliant distributions if it just uses those libraries to
interact
also sprach Eugene Gorodinsky e.gorodin...@gmail.com [2009.11.29.2101 +0100]:
To remove redundancy, you'd have to remove the metadata from the
binary packages. That's surely doable, but would also mean that
a single .deb file would become useless: you could not obtain meta
data from it,
also sprach Eugene Gorodinsky e.gorodin...@gmail.com [2009.11.28.1123 +0100]:
Some packages are available in rpm only, others are available in
dpkg only. Some packages are available in rpm and in dpkg, but not
in the formats for other distributions.
To carry through with what you propose, you
also sprach James Westby [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008.03.26.1747 +0100]:
I had a look on freenode, and #distributions is taken,
#distributions-devel is not, would that be unacceptable to anyone?
oftc is generally a better network, I found... but I don't care.
Shall we set a date for a first
also sprach James Westby [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008.03.26.1828 +0100]:
I don't mind either way, does anyone have a strong preference either
way?
#distros / irc.oftc.net
*very strong* :)
--
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/
my father, a good man, told me:
'never lose your
upstream and maintain only your local
changes. Very cool stuff. It really makes distro maintenance
easy, and even easier for derivatives.
Would you mind if we moved this discussion to the vcs-pkg mailing
list?
--
.''`. martin f. krafft [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: :' : proud Debian developer, author
