Re: [rpm] latest doc?

[R P Herrold <herrold owlriver com>]

Hi, Mike,

I concur in your comments -- I was surprisedm and a bit
disappointed in the 'look backward' nature of the LSB
standard.  Other 'surpurses' are a limitation to LSB 'approved
list' install tools -- basic the common shell utilities.  It
will not affect Red Hat proper directly -- the strong
preference for installing with JUST /bin directory tools is
good policy ( One cannot count on /usr/bin being present )

-- Russ

On Wed, 4 Jul 2001, Mike A. Harris wrote:

> >The LSB has curiously suggested for its standard (in its
> >proposed release 1.0) that a two year old variant of the
> >behaviour ducumented in an appendix to Maximum RPM, excluding
> >triggers, be the 'Linux Standard'  -- It remains to see how
> >this will be accepted by, say, the Debian and Slackware
> >comunities..  Heck, _I_ have problems within the context of
> >current RPM practice with it.
>
> We try to mostly make RPM's build back as far as 5.2 if possible,
> however sometimes they aren't compatible.  We develop for
> rpm 4.0.2 - as it was intended to solve most of the major compat
> probs that were out there.

Heck, I build them back farther for recreation -- but then
that might be considered peculiar.

> If the LSB has standardized on an ancient RPM, then that portion
> of the LSB will end up irrelevant due to defacto standards.
> People who rely on it will end up IMHO no better off than we are
> now.  ;o(

Concur.