Slashdot Mirror
The LSB Delivers Again
gk4 writes "The LSB has updated and published the
gLSB v1.1 draft for review. The LSB has also published for review the new
psLSB for IA32 v1.1 draft and the completed
LSB v1.0.1 Test Suites. Review ends Friday January 4th; however, the LSB welcomes comments from the community at any time."
This is great and dandy and all, but which distro's are going to pay attention to this? Anyone have a link as to the state of LSB-compliance for the major distros?
LSB is an excellent initiative. But the bad thing is the "L" ("Linux") in it.
This standard is designed for Linux, and only Linux.
Standardization of the filesystem namespace is needed on *ALL* Unices. And an unique document that would apply to *ALL* Unices would be a big win, both for developpers and for end-users.
DJB's packaging system isn't that bad. The only trouble is that only DJB promotes it and very few software are packaged that way because it totally changes the traditionnal namespace layout.
{{.sig}}
Yesterday RDF, today LSB. Would it kill the /. authors to define their acronyms, preferably in the title but at least in their text?
/.'d simply because folks are trying to find out "what the hell" the acronym means.
I wonder how many sites get
Well, debian's packaging system isn't going away anytime soon--they are committed to using alien to maintain compliance with the LSB here. But, .debs are not necessarily technically superior to .rpms either. However, there are probably two reasons why them may appear so:
.rpm systems so its not much of an advantage. It does take care of some of the headaches of dependencies automatically, but is probably a only minor advantage of Debian's packaging system.
.debs are superior to .rpms--if you try to use Ximian .debs, or had in the past used Stormix or Progeny .debs, you can run into rpm-like dependency hell quite easily. You even can run into trouble if you try to mix stable and unstable debian packages.
1) APT (Advanced Package Tool). This is even available and usable on
2) Debian's packaging policy and community structure. This is where Debian shines--because each individual maintainer only handles a handful of packages, and there is a strict policy for them to follow, the packages tend to work well together. It's not that
But, all this comes at a price. debian's packagers are volunteers, and so you sometimes have to wait until the volunteer is good and ready to get the packaged software you want. For example, the new control panel and XST upgrades took a couple month's to appear, and there has recently been a little trouble with KDE--the package management changed hands. At least with a commercial system, you (hopefully) have better guarantees about package availability.
There needs to be a WSB... windows standards base... all the differences between 95, 98, ME, NT, 2000, XP are really starting to piss me off. arg.
I'd like to just get a few objections in on the LSB while everyone runs around cackling with perverted glee.
/log come to mind) but at least that lets us get an idea of where the mess all came from, and when we delete the directory we can also delete all dangling symlinks and truly get rid of stuff.
/usr/bin and the lib directories.
I for one am sick of finding files from install packages all over the place. Everyone and their mother is sick of this. Apps should install into ONE directory only. They can symlink everything they want everywhere else (/etc and
Linux is literally worse then windows on this count. PLEASE PLEASE contain the spawl. Someone needs to do an ls -l on