Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Sven Vermeulen <swift@g.o>
Subject: Re: gentoo vs. the FHS
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:20:29 +0200
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 08:08:30PM -0500, Kevin Lacquement wrote:
> Of course, to make proprietary apps happy, Gentoo would also need to be
> LSB-compliant.  And _that_ requires supporting RPMs, which I don't think we
> want to do (see the GWN from April 1).

The LSB states that the distribution must support RPMs, but it doesn't say
how. You don't have to have an rpm-based distribution, you can very well have
a conversion that creates ebuilds from an RPM.

The only problem you would have are dependencies, and the LSB clearly defines
what dependencies are allowed in LSB-RPMs.

Wkr,
	Sven Vermeulen

-- 
 ^__^   And Larry saw that it was Good.
 (oo)                                      Sven Vermeulen
 (__)   http://www.gentoo.org              Gentoo Documentation Project
Attachment:
pgpGd5JdjaMsj.pgp (PGP signature)
References:
gentoo vs. the FHS
-- aeriksson
Re: gentoo vs. the FHS
-- Stanislav Brabec
Re: gentoo vs. the FHS
-- Caleb Tennis
Re: gentoo vs. the FHS
-- dams
Re: gentoo vs. the FHS
-- Kevin Lacquement
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: gentoo vs. the FHS
Next by thread:
Re: gentoo vs. the FHS
Previous by date:
Re: gentoo vs. the FHS
Next by date:
Re: Re: Enemy Territory and Gentoo


Updated Jun 17, 2009

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.