On 8/5/05, Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tushar Teredesai wrote: > > FHS is good, not so sure about LSB since it mandates lot more packages > > like PAM which are not in LFS. > > I didn't read this as "let's go to each of these lists and match > precisely what is good in them". I read it as saying, "we have a package > under consideration for inclusion - is that package mandated by any of > these standards." >
I know, but if the policy states LSB and if the package is mandated by LSB, it would be hard to say when someone asks PAM to be included in LFS-core. -- Tushar Teredesai mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
