Mr. Youngman, In addition to Stuart's comments, you are absolutely correct in saying anything in the LSB is the best. The packaging area is one where tons of people have brilliant ideas on how to extend it. The key is that what is in the LSB is something that most people, on most distributions, can actually use. The more that gets added, the less likely it is that a given package will simply install.
As big as it is, the LSB spec is really about the minimum size an ABI specification can be and still be usable. I expect there will be plenty of opportunities to contribute to follow-on versions. -----Original Message----- From: Stuart Anderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 6:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Packaging and installation spec wording On Fri, 18 May 2001, Anthony W. Youngman wrote: > Just because it's common that doesn't mean its the best. It also stifles > development - look at all the flame wars in the past. Okay, I'm beating > my own drum here, but we want an EXTENSIBLE API, not a frozen-in-stone > program. We are explicitely not specifying a program. We are specifying the format of the .rpm file. You can create it using whatever mechanism you wish, and your distribution should install it using whatever mechanism is available. Stuart Stuart R. Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Metro Link Incorporated South Carolina Office 5807 North Andrews Way 129 Secret Cove Drive Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309 Lexington, SC 29072 voice: 954.660.2500 voice: 803.951.3630 http://www.metrolink.com/ XFree86 Core Team Creative Applications Lab Chair - SIGGRAPH 2001 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
