Pierre Labastie wrote: > I have found 2 sources for pax: > - the mirbsd package, debianised by Debian (the "orig" I put in the > ticket). It does not build as is, because the debian "rules" (a makefile > actually) are shipped separately, and those rules use heavily the debian > packaging system. So we would first have to make a package and put it on > anduin. Also, According to some internet sources, the mirbsd pax program > does not provide the pax format (?), and so, does not pass the lsb tests. > - the heirloom package. You have to download the full heirloom > "toolchest" (not a big deal, it is just 1MB), then edit a config file (I > think a couple of sed's is enough), then issue various make commands (if > you do not want to build the whole toolchest). It seems more doable, but > I may miss some pros and cons, so I ask on this list whether there are > issues with the heirloom package (it does not seem to be much used by > distros)
I've never used pax. IMO, the only reason to have it is for LSB compatibility. That would seem to rule out mirbsd, but I can't understand Debian not meeting LSB requirements. As for the heirloom toolchest, can you answer some basic questions: What packages are available besides pax? Do they conflict with programs from other packages? I'll ask on the LSB mailing list and see if they know. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
