Daniel Carrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [ ... ]
> With respect to (1), I don't think that's quite true. I read an > article a few days ago by one of the LSB members who said that the > LSB doesn't require distros to use RPM as their package system. > Rather, it requires them to be *able* to install RPMs. He gave the > example that Debian's "alien" program fills this requirement. If > this is correct, we could simply have an equivalent of "alien" for > Gentoo. converting a binary rpm to an ebuild is doable. but only to the extent of minor dependency-checking and tracking installed files. maybe someone feels like a masochist and "fixes this" sometime. > With respect to (2), I must say I don't really understand the > problem. If the Gentoo has KDE in /usr/kde/2 and /usr/kde/3, and > LSB doesn't allow /usr/kde, why don't we just move /usr/kde to > /usr/share, so we would make: > > /usr/share/kde/2 > /usr/share/kde/3 because that's misuse of /usr/share. from: <url: http://www.pathname.com/fhs/2.2/fhs-4.11.html> # The /usr/share hierarchy is for all read-only architecture # independent data files. in short, the FHS and LSB do not produce a solution for the problem. it's more defined as a non-issue, and you get pointed to /opt -- which according to the FHS doesn't fit either Gnome or KDE anyway. > I'm sure that this question just demonstrates my ignorance of LSB > and Gentoo, but heck, asking is the only way I'll learn. I've heard that reading also helps. :-) -- Terje -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
