David Douthitt, 2001-07-11 10:42 -0400
>Charles Steinkuehler wrote:
> > I'd like to see a 'ground-up' effort including the new c libraries,
> > 2.2/2.4 kernel support, the new packaging system (likely apkg on
> > steroids), and other enhancements. I don't see any reason to tie
> > these changes to existing releases, and by starting with a clean
> > slate, we don't have to keep any backwards compatibility we don't
> > actually find useful. It might be very convinent, for example to
> > switch to a VFAT format for floppies, and use long filenames for
> > packages...
>
>None of what you mentioned seems to proclaim incompatability. However,
>"compatability" with LRP is a minimal requirement; the only things that
>are involved would be the kernel parameters and the LRP packaging
>scheme.
>
>The rest of the compatability business is basic Linux; you could rework
>the filesystem - move /etc/init.d to /etc/rc.d/init.d or to /sbin/init.d
>for example (I've seen it in both places) - but I don't see too much
>point in it.
>
>Only thing I'd possibly like to do in Oxygen is to move
>/var/boot/modules to /lib/modules/boot (the standard location, I
>understand).
David,
Would it be a good idea for us to follow the LSB 1.0 specs?
http://www.linuxbase.org/
https://sourceforge.net/projects/lsb
--
Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://leaf.sourceforge.net/
_______________________________________________
Leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
