Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
* Les Mikesell [12/11/2008 20:08] :
> The LSB really has no value at all until you can assume that all systems
> comply.
I can't reconcile that with the fact that LSB-compliant packages are
ordered to have dependencies that indicate which LSB modules are
required.
I thought the point of LSB was to make it possible to provide a working
program independently from any distribution's packaging system quirks.
At least that's the only reason I see to care about it at all. If it
just duplicates things packaging systems already do, why bother?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com