Re: LSB and RPM

2001-02-19 Thread Colin Watson
Eric Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I was reading the Linux Standard Base(LSB) spec and see that it >specifies the Redhat Package Manager (RPM) v3 as the standard package >manager. After looking at different approaches and philosophy to linux, >I settled on Debian. Debian of course wants to

Re: LSB and RPM

2001-02-19 Thread Robert Waldner
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001 12:31:21 PST, Nate Amsden writes: >Eric Richardson wrote: >> As in the previous thread -- Why choose Debian? -- it seems the >> packaging, updating system and stability are major plus points. What is >> the long term forecast for package managers and the LSB? Hope this >> hasn'

Re: LSB and RPM

2001-02-19 Thread Nate Amsden
Eric Richardson wrote: > As in the previous thread -- Why choose Debian? -- it seems the > packaging, updating system and stability are major plus points. What is > the long term forecast for package managers and the LSB? Hope this > hasn't been covered. one good reason to choose debian is it wi

LSB and RPM

2001-02-19 Thread Eric Richardson
Hi, I was reading the Linux Standard Base(LSB) spec and see that it specifies the Redhat Package Manager (RPM) v3 as the standard package manager. After looking at different approaches and philosophy to linux, I settled on Debian. Debian of course wants to be standard as in the Filesystem Hierarchy