[ncolug] Re: Mark Shuttleworth on Ubuntu Long Term Support
- From: Chuck Stickelman <cstickelman@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: ncolug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 01:50:43 -0400
mike wrote:
<Chuck>
BTW, I'm a Libertarian - I have equal disdain for both the Democrats and
the Republicans...
</Chuck>
Now this doesn't belong here! The distro stuff is a great topic here
IMHO. Leave the political baggage elsewhere please.
<Chuck>
I'm sorry. I'll keep my political opinions out of this forum.
</Chuck>
<Mike>
Now that I've gone way off track, does anyone know if Ubuntu conforms to
LSB?
</Mike>
Here's some information to help answer that questions:
http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS7478724750.html
Here's what Ubuntu's site has to say about the LSB:
http://www.ubuntu.com/news/guadalinex?highlight=%28LSB%29 which states
that " Ubuntu is working towards complete *LSB* 2.0 compliance."
Here's Debian's info: I can't find anything definitive but I did find
one reference <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Standard_Base> on
Wikipedia that says Sarge is 2.0 compliant, but I know there's more than
a little friction between the two groups. (Some portions of the LSB
seem to favor RPM based distributions - specifically the package
formats, and file locations.)
Again, Debian is free to choose how they want to support any specific
standard. Debian's strongest link to LSB is via the alien program;
though rpms don't have the detailed dependency mechanisms that are
included in a .deb. (Take a look at the meta-information in a .deb
package by running:
` dpkg-deb -e package-version.deb . '
to see the specifics for any given package. I don't know the rpm
equivalent.
</Chuck>
Other related posts:
