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

Re: Packaging stuff

On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, Anthony W. Youngman wrote:

> Okay. I'm quite happy to have a go at specifying something. I'll almost
> certainly need some help, though. It's just that last time I tried, as
> mentioned before, I felt rather "slapped down". I bet Nick will help.

Check with George. He is trying to keep the list of what needs to be written.
The improved database will soon make it easier to look and see what needs
doing, but but there is still a bit of work left before that is fully "in

> Not necessarily a C interface (though that would be nice). Basically a
> standard naming convention, and some form of query/update language that
> says "does package X exist" or "I've just installed package Y". So yes,
> an "lsb --query, lsb --install, lsb --delete" sort of api might well be
> in the works.

I think we have already come up with this command interface. If it isn't in
the document already (and I'm assuming it isn't since we're having this
conversation 8-)) then we need to fix that.

> The idea is that the LSB contains an api, and it's the package database
> guys (eg the RedHat guys who maintain the rpm program or the Deb guys
> who look after apt) to actually write the interface that queries their
> database.

Yes, I think we have been violently agreeing on this part, but a difference
in terminology has been confusing things. When I see API, I think of a C
library interface. I suspect that other also had this misunderstanding.
A command interface provides a higher level interface, which is generally


Stuart R. Anderson                               anderson@metrolink.com

Metro Link Incorporated                          South Carolina Office
5807 North Andrews Way                           129 Secret Cove Drive
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309                   Lexington, SC 29072
voice: 954.660.2500                              voice: 803.951.3630
fax:   954.938.1982                              SkyTel: 800.405.3401

Reply to: