Matt Wilson writes: > On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 03:02:45PM +1100, Christopher Yeoh wrote: > > > > At this stage I don't think we that we should be putting the lsb > > requirement into the packages. AFAIK no distribution has that supplied > > yet so everyone would have to install with --nodeps. > > This is a classic chicken and egg: I can hear the ISVs saying > /exactly/ the same thing as you. If we can't package our own > applictions using the LSB how can we expect the ISV?
Well I don't think its a chicken and egg problem as the problem will go away when distribution creators begin releasing distributions that provide the lsb dependency. We currently have packages that we want people to use that are not only LSB complaint but are simple enough that they will work on most current release distributions. You don't need an LSB compliant distribution to create an LSB compliant application and these tools are useful for this purpose as well as testing the compliance of current tools and distros. What I am saying is that we have should consider whether its a good idea at this point in time to add the lsb requirement because it may just simply confuse people into looking for a package that will provide the lsb dependency when it doesn't yet exist anywhere (we could release an lsb-dummy package which does this, but I'm not sure this is a good idea either). Chris -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] IBM OzLabs Linux Development Group Canberra, Australia
