I'm forwarding this to the lsb-spec mailing list because that is where we should be discussing technical issues. The minutes themselves should be up on linuxbase.org shortly (hmm, I guess this looks kind of disorganized but I want to err on the side of making sure information is available publicly).
P.S. anyone know the status on the lsb-spec web archive? It seemed to have broken on 1 Jan 2000, and even when it was working it seemed to lag by a day or so. Perhaps we should move the mailing lists to sourceforge with the rest of the stuff? Not that I'm attached to that idea, I just would like a web archive one way or another. ------- Start of forwarded message ------- . . . Subject: Re: forwarded LSB meeting minutes from Jim Knoble Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 17:40:31 +0000 (GMT) In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> from "Daniel Quinlan" at Jan 05, 2000 09:17:45 AM Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > - libz, include or not? Small enough to be able to be linked > statically (and license does not require dynamic linking). There are two libz's. Make sure you spec the big one not the little stub one > - libglib? Platform-independence lib used by gtk. Anyone use it > besides gtk/GNOME apps? =20 > =20 > ACTION ITEM: Need to check. > ACTION TAKEN: Did cursory check at meeting, unable to find anythi= > ng. > STATUS: Action item complete. I'm not aware of anything of note. Suggestion though - someone should reserve the names of these commonly used libraries. Gnome/gtk/glib standardisation can be someone elses problem. Should we allow annexes provided by other bodies in charge of things like libraries to be submitted/reviewed added. Eg so that the KDE folks can spec KDE, the gnome folks spec Gnome and spread the work > - libjpeg, libpng, libXpm, libtiff, libungif: Should be left out of > spec and carried around with apps. > =20 > (Ted Ts'o notes that distributions can easily link dynamically). These are an issue. We need to get kde/gnome/etc all using the same version of the library as it is linked with basically every application. Static is not an option for them. > Suggestion from John Terpstra to use test suite that comes with > ncurses-5. Should we just spec ncurses? Linux apps expect color. The BSD curses people apparently declared the old BSD curses dead at some point for ncurses - can someone confirm that ? > - libgdbm: leave it out. libdb is already in spec. Which version of libdb ? libdb2.x is in part non free. > Suggestion to use package names for init.d namespace, since package > names are unique due to package manager. [Not true for RPM - you can have two versions of the same package installed together in weird circumstances[ Simple extra suggestion: Use lsb_vendorname_package for all LSB packages. No existing vendor package I can find adds an init file that starts lsb_ ------- End of forwarded message -------
