On Mon, 2002-09-23 at 10:08, Mike MacCana wrote: > No, I meant Linux, which to me means the LSB (www.linuxbase.org). > > Which I think in a few years time will be most people's definition of > Linux.
fine but that doesn't say anything about rpms, or any packaging system (and if it did I doubt it would get much support!). > On Mon, 2002-09-23 at 10:25, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > <quote who="Mike MacCana"> > > > My personal opinion is that there's only two methods of installing > > > software on Linux: > > > > > > a) RPM > > > b) badly > > > > s/Linux/RPM-based distributions/ > > [ ... at least I would hope that's what you meant. :-) ] on redhat I agree it's better to use rpms (other linux flavours have much better systems, even Sun pkgs are better than rpms IMO, but I've never had very high opinions of rpm anyway, but I think this subject has been well battered to death by now (i'm fed up with it anyway)). As I think I've shown rpms won't do what I want in this case so I'm stuck and can't use just an rpm. Thanks all those who suggested things. Dave. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
