[Packaging] Re: [lsb-discuss] archive format
gk4 at austin.ibm.com
Tue Mar 11 08:31:37 PST 2003
> As it stands, non-rpm distributions are going to continue to make
> a half-hearted effort at supporting the lsb, and rpm distributions are
> going to continue to see the lsb-rpm as validation to their choise of
> using rpm as a packaging format.
The LSB does not specify what the "distribution" uses for packaging.
The LSB only specifies that the distribution is able to install RPM
packages LSB software applications.
> Im a Free Software person myself, when i want compatability i use
> autoconf, and send the source code, that voids the need for this
> lsb stuff.
There is a huge difference between source code compatibility and binary
compatibility. The developer/supplier needs to choose which he/she
> The lsb is currently only aimed at open source people, oepn source
> people are more tolerant of binary only stuff, and hence need the lsb
> magic to replace autoconf.
The LSB is aimed at both open source and commercial software; hence, the
LSB's ISV survey...
More information about the lsb-discuss