Linked by Andrew Barilla on Tue 10th Feb 2004 20:08 UTC
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
More News »
Sponsored Links



"i know gentoo adheres to it in spirit and to the letter!"
Not quite.
Gentoo considers FHS violations to be only minor bugs (see for instance http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15315). I couldn't find any references to Gentoo's stance wrt the LSB, but I assume it's similar.
This doesn't compare too favourably with other distributions; Debian, for example, regards all FHS and LSB violations as being release-critical (http://people.debian.org/~ajt/sarge_rc_policy.txt).