[email protected] writes:

> 1. building appstores or repositories that can be used by different
> Linux distributions, comforming to different levels of LSB, and then
> populated by different apps devellopers, hopefully including big
> packages like gnome and kde, and possibly also packagers picking up
> sources, maybe even debian packagers.  In this way even smaller distros
> could have a large set of packages, and developpers could have one place
> to address a lot of distros.  This could be built for the different
> architectures including i386, amd64 and arm.

This is a dying mechanism of software distribution.  You can achieve the
same goal by shipping a container or some container-like thing that
includes all the shared libraries you care about.

Given the lead time for a new standardization effort, I'm dubious there
will be any remaining use case for this by the time a standard ships.
Containers solve the problem of isolation from OS-level software changes
in a more thorough and far less expensive way than trying to standardize
the OS-level ABI.

The cost is that you lose the benefit of OS-level security patching, but
once you have a continuous build system for your container and some update
mechanism (both of which you will probably need for other reasons anyway),
you can get back to a reasonable cadence for security patches without that
much effort.  (And a lot of application providers would prefer to isolate
their security patching from the operating system anyway.)

-- 
Russ Allbery ([email protected])              <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
_______________________________________________
lsb-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lsb-discuss

Reply via email to