Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Andrew <afrayedknot AT thefrayedknot.armory.com>]

> "The distribution itself may use a different packaging format for its 
> own packages, and of course it may use any available mechanism for 
> installing the LSB-conformant packages."

call me crazy, and im probably the only person who see's it this
way, but im not sure that this is forcing us to use rpm's (ick). Does
LSB-conformant package mean that it _has_ to be packaged as an rpm? based
on the "any available mechanism" phrase i tend to disagree, i interprit
that to mean anything that is functionally equivalent to rpm. I would
stand behind the claim that sorcery can do roughly the same things as
rpm and is therefore an "availible mechanism". I may be wrong but i
think LSB-conformant package is just any software that conforms to the
directory layout etc in LSB, not how it is bundled. 

Maybe going a little deeper here why would the bother with this statement
otherwise? If we interprit it to mean we can install our standard base
off of a tar.gz file on the iso but everything else has to be done
through rpm, they wouldnt have bothered saying "any availible mechanism".

on the other hand it really doesnt matter because we probably arent
going to pay for their stamp of approval anyways.

Andrew