Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.os.linux.ubuntu > #186676
| From | Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.os.linux.ubuntu, alt.os.linux |
| Subject | Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" |
| Date | 2016-01-26 10:11 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <dgpr7hFq1npU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <n87th1$1d9$1@news.albasani.net> <0tueabt95iasf1gm0e1692ne2m19ik5qrf@4ax.com> <87oac8wd03.fsf@thumper.dhh.gt.org> <dgpp4kFpgrrU1@mid.individual.net> <87fuxkw7bl.fsf@thumper.dhh.gt.org> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
John Hasler wrote: > Mike Easter writes: >> The 800 pound gorilla which doesn't LSB is Debian. > > Debian strives to comply with the FSH, POSIX, and other relevant > standards. LSB, however, is about binary compatibility with > LSB-certified closed-source software. The fact that Ubuntu dropped > support for it indicates how relevant it is. > > Alien and other LSB tools are there if you want them, though. > This is a 2015 message in the mailing lists for debian-devel and debian-lsb https://lists.debian.org/debian-lsb/2015/07/msg00000.html Debian LSB compliance (was: Re: Standard-producing bodies and Debian) Mid-year 2015 was also when the Linux Foundation released LSB 5.0, so LSB 'development' is ongoing by the foundation. So, I would say that LSB is an ongoing project of interest/value to the foundation, while it is NOT to Debian. I think that is a rather significant 'schism'. -- Mike Easter
Back to alt.os.linux.ubuntu | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2016-01-26 12:04 -0200
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2016-01-26 09:56 -0600
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2016-01-26 09:36 -0800
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2016-01-26 11:59 -0600
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> - 2016-01-26 10:11 -0800
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-27 04:59 -0700
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-01-26 19:39 +0100
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2016-01-26 13:10 -0600
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2016-01-26 13:12 -0600
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-27 04:58 -0700
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" gamo <gamo@telecable.es> - 2016-01-27 13:16 +0100
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-27 06:37 -0700
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2016-01-27 10:23 +0100
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-01-26 15:15 -0800
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2016-01-27 00:16 +0000
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2016-01-27 02:26 +0000
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-27 06:12 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2016-01-27 09:00 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 09:03 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 00:46 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-01-26 22:57 -0800
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 03:35 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-27 08:55 -0600
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 10:10 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-27 09:15 -0600
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 10:20 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 10:28 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2016-01-27 10:06 -0600
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 11:19 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-27 10:58 -0600
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 16:11 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-27 10:36 -0600
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-27 10:41 -0600
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 16:08 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 10:13 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-01-26 22:45 -0800
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 03:28 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-27 05:57 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-27 13:08 +0100
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 07:49 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dverbeek@xs4all.nl> - 2016-01-27 23:41 +0100
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.c.o.m> - 2016-01-29 07:27 -0600
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-29 08:49 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r_wizard@WizardsTower.invalid> - 2016-01-29 10:23 -0600
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-29 12:59 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-29 21:26 +0000
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-29 20:01 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" Catzilla <catzilla@pussyboss.invalid> - 2016-01-30 12:41 +0000
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 00:41 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2016-01-26 22:56 -0800
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 03:32 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 00:41 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 00:43 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 00:44 -0500
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-27 05:41 -0700
Re: "Linux is not fragmented; it's united" DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> - 2016-01-27 07:52 -0500
csiph-web