On Tue, 2002-12-31 at 18:50, Toshiro wrote:
Are you sure? Maybe I'm wrong, but I have the idea that (at least a long time
ago :) Slackware has a somewhat different directory layout (especially below
the /etc directory).
Anyone with recent experience with Slackware can confirm this? (I
Forgive my stupidity, but i thought Linux was based on the System V system
and BSD (Berkley System Distribution) was a different flavour of Unix to
Linux. Not all unices are the same but Linux is heading to the posix/LSB
standard to make it easier for more program compatability.
Of course
030104 Michael Adams wrote:
I have noticed on my short time on this list
that most questions should have been posted newbie first anyway.
'newby' (ugh! reaches for verbicide: sb 'novice') 'expert' are relative:
contrast 'angel' 'devil', which are categorical (cp Milton et al).
--
On Sat, 04 Jan 2003 04:25, Philip Webb wrote:
030104 Michael Adams wrote:
I have noticed on my short time on this list
that most questions should have been posted newbie first anyway.
'newby' (ugh! reaches for verbicide: sb 'novice') 'expert' are relative:
contrast 'angel' 'devil', which
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003 09:50:31 +1300
Michael Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
LOL, i am not sure if i should be insulted or not. I bow before a more
complex (possibly eccentrically deranged) mind.
Perhaps only arbitrarily dysfunctional.
Charles
Where is John Carson now that
On Fri, 2003-01-03 at 06:14, Michael Adams wrote:
Forgive my stupidity, but i thought Linux was based on the System V system
and BSD (Berkley System Distribution) was a different flavour of Unix to
Linux. Not all unices are the same but Linux is heading to the posix/LSB
standard to make it
The directory structure is the same in all i386 linux's ... What is in
those directories does vary slightly.. rpm names/versions may vary but
the directory structure is the same..
Are you sure? Maybe I'm wrong, but I have the idea that (at least a long time
ago :) Slackware has a somewhat
Mark,
A definitive answer would have to come from MDK on this. So what I'm
saying here is based on what I've read, to include parts of the LSB.
However this is one big long boring doc... LSB compliance does cause
some problems with a number of Desktop type applications and a number of
apps
James,
Speaking of which, what exactly is the deal with LSB comlpiance? The LSB website says
that the ProSuite specifically is compliant. Does that mean the d/l version is not?
Also I seem to remember LSB being a package category during the installation of 9.
Do I remember correctly? If so, why
is not included with the D/L version that would be
required for LSB compliance, one would expect that it is, too.
Joeb
---Original Message---
From: Miark [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12/29/02 03:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [expert] Difference between distros
James,
Speaking
Where can I find a FAQ detailing the differences between the directory
structures used between the various distributions?
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
The directory structure is the same in all i386 linux's ... What is in
those directories does vary slightly.. rpm names/versions may vary but
the directory structure is the same..
James
On Sun, 2002-12-29 at 13:07, Jim C wrote:
Where can I find a FAQ detailing the differences between the
Well OK, but for example I notice that Redhat RPMs frequently use the
/usr/local directories differently from Mandrake and likely other
distributions do also. Is there nowhere where I can find out about this?
James Sparenberg wrote:
The directory structure is the same in all i386 linux's ...
Not really and with the advent of the LSB the versions that are meeting
LSB compliance (RH and MDK are the leaders here) are less and less
different. The diffence isn't the tree structure... but rather the
leaves. (pardon my pun) but executables are in bin libs are in lib etc
etc...
James
On
14 matches
Mail list logo
