[clue-tech] Any Gentoo users in the group?

[Collins Richey]

On 9/1/07, Dennis J Perkins <dennisjperkins at comcast.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-09-01 at 07:51 -0600, Collins Richey wrote:
> > On 8/31/07, dennisjperkins at comcast.net <dennisjperkins at comcast.net> wrote:
> > > If there are any Gentoo users in the group, do they know if Gentoo is LSB compliant?
> > > _______________________________________________
> >
> > Gentoo is mostly and intentionally LSB compliant, but the LSB has some
> > ridiculous notions about the /usr hierarchy that interfere with the
> > ability to include multiple versions of major systems like KDE and
> > GNOME. Instead of throwing these i /usr/bin, they use something like
> > /usr/kde/<rel>/bin so that KDE releases don't conflict with one
> > another.
> >
> > Most distros live quite happily with the /usr restrictions, because
> > they don't care about multiple KDE/GNOME releases.
> >
>
> I've been exploring bootscripts and that has expanded into how various
> distros handle them.
>

I haven't really studied the LSB. My general impression in the past
was the the LSB was really the RH[RedHat}SB, ie that they took RH
usage from about 5 years ago and made it the standard, although I have
heard that Debian had significant input as well.

Whatever. I'm not especially interested in the LSB. Gentoo bootscripts
are a completely new creation with dependency checking built in, and
the runlevels are pretty much irrelevant. Even Debian/Ubuntu has a
different scheme of runlevels. And then there's Slackware, one of my
favorites, who have stuck with BSD style bootscripts.

Since most users will never encounter anything but runlevel5(4 for
some distros) for gui and runlevel 6 for shutdown, the whole business
of trying to cooerce everyone into an (IMHO) antequated pattern is
just a big ho-hum.

-- 
Collins Richey
     If you fill your heart with regrets of yesterday and the worries
     of tomorrow, you have no today to be thankful for.