Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 5th May 2008 21:00 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 313076
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Well, I meant that the LSB project tries to stablish a core system (including specific libraries), so that third party application packages can just depend on lsb-core. For instance, take this section:
http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org/LSB_3.2.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB...
"Packages shall have a dependency that indicates which LSB modules are required. [...] Packages shall not depend on other system-provided dependencies. They shall not depend on non-system-provided dependencies unless the package provider also makes available the LSB conforming packages needed to satisfy such dependencies. "
Well, I meant that the LSB project tries to stablish a core system (including specific libraries), so that third party application packages can just depend on lsb-core. For instance, take this section:
http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org/LSB_3.2.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB...
"Packages shall have a dependency that indicates which LSB modules are required. [...] Packages shall not depend on other system-provided dependencies. They shall not depend on non-system-provided dependencies unless the package provider also makes available the LSB conforming packages needed to satisfy such dependencies. "
http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org/LSB_3.2.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB...
"Packages shall have a dependency that indicates which LSB modules are required. [...] Packages shall not depend on other system-provided dependencies. They shall not depend on non-system-provided dependencies unless the package provider also makes available the LSB conforming packages needed to satisfy such dependencies. "
Yes, LSB tries to establish a core. And most of it is okay, but it still doesn't go quite far enough. Personally, I think they need to get RPM out of LSB and replace it with something like (though not necessarily) Autopackage. It would make the LSB a far better standard, and would really help towards Linux on the Desktop too.





Member since:
2008-04-04
'The LSB guys have been trying to do just that for years'
No they have not.
The LSB extends upon the FHS. How can they achieve AppDirs (or AppDir like solutions) when they extend the FHS?