Floris Bruynooghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hmm, I've never read the packaging sections of the LSB (and maybe I > should before making a comment like this)
<URL:http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org/LSB_3.2.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/packagefmt.html> > but I've always heard complaints that it is very RPM-centric and > ignores DEBs etc. The LSB core specification does recommend (and specify the format of) RPM packages for distribution; but it doesn't require the system to use RPMs natively, only that such packages should be installable. Note: Supplying an RPM format package is encouraged because it makes systems easier to manage. This specification does not require the implementation to use RPM as the package manager; it only specifies the format of the package file. <URL:http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org/LSB_3.2.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/swinstall.html> So, a Debian system is LSB-compliant if it enables the installation of externally-produced LSB-compliant RPM packages. This is easily done by making an appropriate tool available; I think 'alien' is the one used on a Debian system. The LSB folks have (IMHO as an outside observer) worked quite well with the Debian project and vice versa. A Debian system now has various 'lsb-*' packages available that make it simple to bring a Debian system into compliance with the various specifications of the LSB (note: I don't know what gaps in compliance may remain even with those packages installed). -- \ “Everything is futile.” —Marvin of Borg | `\ | _o__) | Ben Finney _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
