[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: My ideas on LSB

On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 tytso@mit.edu wrote:

>    Linux has no standard component location organization.  Such a situation
>    makes it difficult for 3rd party software vendors to make installation
>    scripts and know where to put program components.  Hey!  We've got FHS
>    so this is mostly done.
> Exactly.

But this job isn't complete. Third-party developers need more guidance
beyond the FHS, since that spec still allows a number of options. The
LSB needs to recommend a default, while allowing that any FHS-compliant
placement is OK.

>    Linux has no stadardized program installation method.  This is a minor
>    problem but one, that if addressed in a competant manner, will make it
>    easier for users and ISVs alike.
> The current plans of the LSB is to provide a standard package format
> (currently RPM), and a standard command-line installation tool which can
> be executed by the user to install an LSB application. 

Will the LSB tighten the RPM spec so that we don't have the kind of
compatibility problems we have now (ie, a Red Hat RPM won't necessarily be
installable on a Caldera system, a SuSE RPM won't install on Turbo, etc.)?
I've seen significant developer frustration over this one.

If that's not dealt with, then we have a problem -- someone building an
LSB-compliant app would still be able to produce an RPM package that won't
install on all LSB-compliant distros, in which case the value of the
standard diminishes significantly.

Most sources of such RPM compatibility problems (ie, are spec files
case-sensitive) should be easy to fix, but they can't be ignored. Will LSB
develop a standard dependency naming scheme for what it deems to be base
components? Or will an LSB compliant app look for an "LSB" in the
RPM database?

evan leibovitch <evan@starnix.com>                            starnix inc.
tollfree: 1-87-pro-linux                         brampton, ontario, canada
http://www.starnix.com              professional linux services & products

Reply to: