tytso at mit.edu
Fri Oct 27 06:09:28 PDT 2006
On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 10:16:34AM +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 26-10-2006 20:08:59 -0400, Michael Sweet wrote:
> > Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > > ...
> > > A package manager that can install into an arbitrary offset, such as 
> > > can of course easily handle the offset "/" for the host OS.
> > Given that we are talking about LSB packaging, RPM is the "standard"
> > package format, and any OS that doesn't use RPM natively will need to
> > support the RPM functionality/dependencies/etc. It's great that
> > Gentoo can support it, but the important thing is that current RPM
> > supports it...
> I see. I was hoping for a more generic description of functionalities
> and requirements using *any* package manager to which we could comply
> to, and contribute in its specifications. Since this is not the case,
> I'm out. Sorry. Thanks for your answer.
If people want to talk about some new packaging standard that might
one day replace RPM and dpkg, I'm sure we could provide a mailing
list, but past efforts have never achieved critical mass, and without
critical mass, it's hard to see how we could get a sizeable majority
of the distributions to decide to switch to some new, all-singing,
all-dancing package management system. There is a huge cost to
switching, after all. But of folks want to engage in a research
effort that might or might not go anywhere, I'm sure we could provide
a forum for such a discussion.
For the LSB, though, we really need to talk about what we can achieve
in a resonable short-term effort, and what we believe major
distributions would be willing to ship and which ISV's would be
willing to use in the near future.
More information about the lsb-discuss