ALFS/LSB...LSB, your thoughs

Gerard Beekmans gerard at
Sat Jul 8 09:38:12 PDT 2000

<cut everything that you're not reading here>

> carefully explain to them the virtues of, say, Debian, and the associated
> virtues of recursive dependency checking, and they'll just nod, smile, and
> say, "Red Hat, please." Well the customer is always right. So if you don't
> plan for rpm compatibility, you're needlessly limiting your audience. You
> don't have to insist on rpm, but I think you do have to make room for it.

That is a good point yes. Although creating our own package management
system would be a nice thing to play with, I now also see the point of
needing to support rpm and the like (to satisfy the people who think
they know a lot but have just heard a buzzword or two).

I also agree with Jesse and you that this can wait for now. Let's first
get the profile parser/compiler/whatever you want to call it, working
and then we can build the rest around it. It would be nice that you can
specify in the profile which package management you want to use and the
tool has to give a clear description what the difference is between rpm,
dpkg and the alfs one.

Gerard Beekmans

-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-
Mail archive:
IRC access: server: port: 6667 channel: #LFS
Unsubscribe: email alfs-discuss-request at and put
"unsubscribe" (without the quotation marks) in the body of the message
(no subject is required)

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list