[Klug-general] If RPM based distros wanted to change...

[J D Freeman]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 03:08:49PM +0000, Karl Lattimer wrote:
> deb has way better dependency handling but RPM is improving over time.

Yes, this is true, apart from a couple of poorly created packages, where
the developer sets the dependancy to libmyfavouritecodebits version
1.0.5.compiledUnderANewMoon.on.a.tuesday.duringAParty. And only that
version, not, say, libmyfavouritecodebits version 1.0.5 or greater.

This caused problems when upgradeing things and you get package a
wanting the above compiledUnderANewMoon version, and one wants the
CompileInDayLight version, and it wont let you ahve both, but you know
full well that the daylight version supports everything in the newmoon
version.

I am using this as a liducrous example which annoyed me the other night
at 4 in the morning when mozilla farted in a dist-upgrade. Debian
package versions are more sensible normally.

> > What about LSB, is RPM still a requirement for it?
> 
> I think the requirement was always _A_ package manager of a selection.
> rpm/deb I think are both in there I might be wrong though.

Thats 5 times I have read that as LSD nor LSB.

J
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFiAFO42M0lILkmGIRAhzOAKCDF87ggEGFZq6X+1HO6qFoSVk2SgCg0HAO
+0J6P/+g6Uz8KF3ei8peyZc=
=EGex
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----