According to Grant Bowman: > * Miquel van Smoorenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020507 09:07]: > > If your package is a .lsb package, then it should follow the LSB. > > However, it appears your package is a .deb package, so why should > > it follow the LSB? > > Hi Mike, > > We had this discussion already and you didn't answer my last post in > January. I have read a different interpretation of the LSB > specification than you have. Any comment?
No. Perhaps our interpretations are different. So be it. I just happen to think that my interpretation is the right one. For example, for LSB compliance, you need to link against glibc-2.0.x. How can a native woody package *ever* be compliant ? It can't, and it isn't supposed to be. Same story with the init scripts. Mike. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
