----- Original Message ----- From: "Todd Charron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "debian isp" <debian-isp@lists.debian.org> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 9:40 PM Subject: Re: LSB and Debian, Commercial perspective
Sure it *can* do rpm, but my question is *should* we encourage the use of rpm. One of Debian's main strength is in its packaging. The reliability of apt-get, the thorough testing a package goes through to make it into stable, etc. Do we really want to encourage people going around and installing rpms on their systems all the time when more appropriate debian packages are already out there? I would much prefer the LSB to support .deb as an alternative then to have the rpm support provided by Debian be what "squeaks" it by for certification. After all, if you're getting support from an LSB certified tech they might just say "install this rpm..." rather then know the more appropriate solution for debian (which might just be "grab this deb from the archive"). Todd ----------------------- I can see what you mean... I agree that IMHO Debs are far superior to RPMs too. As for the LSB certified tech saying "install this rpm...", well, owing to the Open Source nature of things, in theory there could be a multitude of package managers and such. I don't think many of the average "techs" would know all these package managers. So yes... it isn't an ideal/optimal solution to use RPMs, but at least it would work. As I mentioned, I'm not so interested in the technical merits of the issue... I'm most concerned about Debian and certification. Because with more and more vendors supporting Linux, I can see that they will be turning to "certified" distros to ease their tech support issues. I really hope that those of us in the commercial sectors won't be forced to use other distros, just because Debian refuses to get certified.
