On Monday 03 March 2003 02:48 pm, Daniel Carrera wrote: > On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 02:39:00PM -0700, Collins wrote: > > This is all fine and dandy, but you need to direct this to LSB, and > > rational logic doesn't seem to go very far with that group. > > You are being very unfair. As much as they'd like to, the LSB *can not* > simply decide on the most rational system. They have to decide on the > least *obtrusive* system which is still complete enough to be meaningful. > We need to make it as easy as possible for most distros to become > compliant while at the same time making compliance useful for something. > It's not an easy balance, and it is a balance that is almost guaranteed to > *not* produce the best system possible. The problem is that designing the > best system possible would require such an effort for distributions that > it would impede the acceptance of Linux. > > It's best to start with the simplest thing, and then slowly move to make > it more complete and if possible, closer to the ideal. This is the kind > of thing that is discussed in the LSB-Future mailing list.
IMHO, b.s. There is nothing inherently "obtrusive" or difficult to implement about a rational system that provides a simple but effective directory structure for multiple versions of major packages. There is no more effort for vendors in supplying major packages in a /usr/pkg directory, for example, than in scattering the appropriate files all over the /usr structure. It's just a minor restructuring of the much beloved RPM specs, and extension to $PATH, etc. Sorry, that dog won't hunt! -- Collins Richey - Denver Area Athlon-XP gentoo 1.4_rc2 kde 3.1 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
