Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> You really think we must abandon .deb package format and
> switch over to rpm's for LSB conformance? You think the LSB has a
> snowballs chance in hell of succeeding if they mandate that (which I
> believe they do not)?
It's my understanding that LSB compliant d
* Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020507 15:14]:
> You really think we must abandon .deb package format and
> switch over to rpm's for LSB conformance? You think the LSB has a
> snowballs chance in hell of succeeding if they mandate that (which I
> believe they do not)?
That's sill
>>"Miquel" == Miquel van Smoorenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Miquel> According to Grant Bowman:
>> * Miquel van Smoorenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020507 09:07]:
>> > If your package is a .lsb package, then it should follow the LSB.
>> > However, it appears your package is a .deb package, so
>>"Grant" == Grant Bowman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Grant> I am looking for validation in the specification itself that
Grant> the LSB applies to systems as a whole and not to only *.lsb
Grant> packages. This seems like a crazy premise to me, but I'm
Grant> having trouble finding justificat
According to Grant Bowman:
> * Miquel van Smoorenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020507 09:07]:
> > If your package is a .lsb package, then it should follow the LSB.
> > However, it appears your package is a .deb package, so why should
> > it follow the LSB?
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> We had this discussion alre
>>"Grant" == Grant Bowman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Grant> * Miquel van Smoorenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020507 09:07]:
>> If your package is a .lsb package, then it should follow the LSB.
>> However, it appears your package is a .deb package, so why should
>> it follow the LSB?
Grant> We
* Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020507 09:08]:
> On Tue, May 07, 2002 at 04:18:13AM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> > No, the purpose of the LSB is to provide a standard ABI and API for
> > applications to link and program against, whether or not the
> > underlying system has the Linux kerne
* Miquel van Smoorenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020507 09:07]:
> If your package is a .lsb package, then it should follow the LSB.
> However, it appears your package is a .deb package, so why should
> it follow the LSB?
Hi Mike,
We had this discussion already and you didn't answer my last post in
J
On Tue, May 07, 2002 at 04:18:13AM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote:
> On May 07, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > The LSB is necessary to avoid diversity among GNU/Linux distributions.
> > There is only one GNU system, as such no diversity, and all of what the LSB
> > specifies as far as I have seen it (I
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Craig Small <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hello,
> I have got bug #138251 which talks about the init.d script and how it
>is missing some nices things etc.
>
>Should Debian scripts be following the LSB and if so, why doesn't the
>policy either mention the LSB or have
On May 07, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> The LSB is necessary to avoid diversity among GNU/Linux distributions.
> There is only one GNU system, as such no diversity, and all of what the LSB
> specifies as far as I have seen it (I have not made a thorough analysis) is
> simply defined by the one implem
REQUEST FOR URGENT BUSINESS ASSISTANCE
--
I stumbled into your contact by stroke of luck after a
long search for an honest and trust worthy person who
could handle issue with high confidentiality.
I was so dilghted when i got your contact and i decided
to contact
12 matches
Mail list logo
