* Jeffrey Watts ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [001025 12:03]: > > Nick, I want to point out that I believe your point of view is skewed. > You're apparently viewing this debate entirely from the point of view of a > GNU/Linux _user_. The LSB was not really formed to address user concerns.
Yes, I'm hearing a lot of this. LSB was not meant to do this. LDPS was not meant to address that. These are artificially imposed limitations - and what you go on to say implies that we're imposing these limitations so as not to upset the distributions. Regardless of how you explain the reasons for imposing such limitations, they ARE arbitrary. And I hope you realize that whatever LSB decides necessarily puts a bias on the future of Linux if indeed the distros follow LSB. If LSB decides RPM is just fine only for LSB-related programs/libraries/etc, then what we are doing is pushing the distro world toward RPM for everything. If RPM is not a sufficient solution for everything (and IMO it is not, at least not by itself), then we have done a disservice to all of Linux simply because we didn't want to go beyond our arbitrarily imposed boundry. -Nick -- ********************************************************** Nicholas Petreley Caldera Systems - LinuxWorld/InfoWorld [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.petreley.com - Eph 6:12 ********************************************************** .
