Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 1st Nov 2005 21:03 UTC
Linux The Open Source Business Conference here will open on Tuesday to the news from the Free Standards Group that the Linux Standards Base has been approved as an ISO standard.
Permalink for comment 54591
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
poor choice
by TomHu on Wed 2nd Nov 2005 14:18 UTC
TomHu
Member since:
2005-07-20

Does an rpm package contain dependency information itself, or is it just those high-level tools (urpmi...) that maintain their own dependency list for each known package?

The choice of RPM as the basis for the package format was made based on practicalness. Nearly every distribution has the ability to install a RPM format package, including Debian (using alien). As nice as the Debian packaging system is, other distributions just don't have the tools to be able to process packages in that format.

Seriously poor reason to enforce rpm compat.
That's not a standard it's just:"Everybody does it. yes it's poor, but still... everybody does it, so we enforce it."

One year ago I had the pleasure to meet "urpmi", it didn't work the way documented, and it didn't do this reliably, thus I never believed it to be a way out of rpm-hell, which I left about 5 years ago.

Poor technical design and implementation doesn't make up for wide usage, see Windows, I thought the OpenSource community was about quality software.

LSB also receives some criticism:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/udrepper/8511.html

I think enforcing an incomplete flawed standard-proposal as a standard is no good. However this seems to be a business decision about making money with "standards compliance" banner on boxes and support contracts.

It simply sucks.

Reply Score: 3