| |||||||||||||
Wrong order?Wrong order?Posted Apr 1, 2012 12:29 UTC (Sun) by anselm (subscriber, #2796)In reply to: Wrong order? by renox Parent article: Free is too expensive (Economist)
in theory they agreed to use RPM, in practice this is meaningless Within LSB, RPM was supposed to be the distribution format for packages. Nobody ever said that a LSB-compliant distribution would need to actually use RPM for its own packages; it would only need to be able to install LSB-compliant third-party packages that came in RPM format, which is an entirely different ball-game.
(Log in to post comments)
Wrong order? Posted Apr 2, 2012 11:26 UTC (Mon) by Seegras (subscriber, #20463) [Link]
And besides, rpm was chosen because at that time the most popular distributions were using it, not because its the best. And some distibutions like Debian refused to "downgrade". As it happens, now distributions using deb are more popular (And I'm glad about it ;))
|
|||||||||||||