> > > We only accepted the LSB on the proviso that it would not interfere > > > with other packages - that it could be handled entirely by the people > > > who were interested in supporting LSB applications. I object to any > > > proposal to expand it beyond this.
On Sat, Jan 24, 2004 at 02:28:13AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: > > You seem to be asserting that we, as a project, shouldn't recognize such > > standards violations as bugs. On Sat, Jan 24, 2004 at 12:02:06PM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote: > Correct. Violating the LSB is not a bug. Nor is violating the win32 > API. Neither of them are relevant; we ship Debian packages, not LSB > packages or win32 programs, even though Debian happens to be able to > run all three under certain conditions. I'll agree with you this far: a violation of the win32 API could be a bug in wine, but not a bug in libc6. -- Raul
