On Thu, 2004-12-09 at 13:04 -0800, Michael K. Edwards wrote: > If ISVs want "exactly the same", they are free to install a chroot > environment containing the binaries they certify against and to supply > a kernel that they expect their customers to use. That's the approach > I've had to take when bundling third-party binaries built by people > who were under the illusion that "exactly the same" was a reasonable > thing to ask for. Once I got things working in my chroot, and > automated the construction of the chroot, I switched back to the > kernel I wanted to use; the ISV and I haven't troubled one another > since.
Wishing the ISVs operated a different way doesn't really get us any closer to a solution.. > If the LSB only attempts to certify things that haven't forked, then > it's a no-op. Well, that's not quite fair; I have found it useful to > bootstrap a porting effort using lsb-rpm. But for it to be a software > operating environment and not just a software porting environment, it > needs to have a non-trivial scope, which means an investment by both > ISVs and distros. That's precisely what we're trying to do. :-) -- Ian Murdock 317-578-8882 (office) http://www.progeny.com/ http://ianmurdock.com/ "All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible." -T.E. Lawrence