| 1 |
quoth the Albert Hopkins: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> [Comment about Gentoo's non-participation in LSB] |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> While I somewhat agree, I think Gentoo's main selling point (at least |
| 6 |
> for me) is that is the way it stands out from your typical Linux distro. |
| 7 |
> It's source-based package system was once what distinguished it from the |
| 8 |
> rest. In summary, I don't think Gentoo should totally adapt to what |
| 9 |
> "the rest" are going any more than I think Slackware or GoboLinux |
| 10 |
> should. What I do see is that perhaps there are ideas that Gentoo has |
| 11 |
> that maybe other distros could benefit from, and vice versa. But |
| 12 |
> sometimes we have to agree to disagree with "mainstream". |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> Albert W. Hopkins |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Exactly. LSBs insistence on using RPM as the "One True Package Manager" seems |
| 17 |
incredibly daft to me. It was RPM-hell that steered me towards Gentoo all |
| 18 |
those years ago in the first place. I cannot put into words how much I loathe |
| 19 |
RPM. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Seems to me if Gentoo wholesale adopted the LSB then it would be little more |
| 22 |
than another Redhat/SuSe clone no? And nobody here wants that, do they? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Portage (or the tree as Ciaran puts it) is _still_ the chief reason I use |
| 25 |
Gentoo, and I rather think it will always be... |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
just another Gentoo luser, |
| 28 |
-d |
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
darren kirby :: Part of the problem since 1976 :: http://badcomputer.org |
| 31 |
"...the number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected..." |
| 32 |
- Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, June 1972 |
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives