Re: conformance definitions

[Matt Wilson <msw@redhat.com>]

I sent this comment privately to the lsb-conformace list.  I'll send
it again here:

LSB Linux Distribution Certification Pilot:

   o The distribution provides the "lsb" package to satisfy the
   primary LSB application dependency 

This should read:
	
   o The distribution provides a package which provides the
   requirement "lsb" equal to the version of the specification the
   distribution complies.

(for example, the package that provides the needed functionality to
run LSB applications should contain "Provides: lsb = 1.1" and contain
all requirements for any other package required to provide LSB
conformance)

Cheers,

Matt
   
On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 01:37:21PM -0600, George Kraft IV wrote:
> I've changed the word conformance to certification in the LSB pilot webpage and
> I have hyper-linked referenced LSB Application Conformance and LSB
> Implementation Conformance.
> 
> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/lsb/website/test/pilot/
> 
> The awkwardness that I see is that the LSB Distribution Certification Pilot and
> the LSB Build Environment Certification Pilot are based off of the LSB
> Implementation Conformance.  We know that the distributions requires a
> successful set of runtime libraries, but not necessarily the header files.  We
> also know that the build environment requires a successful set of header files,
> but not necessarily the shared libraries because of the stub-libraries.
> 
> Do we make the distinction between the two in the certification pilot or in the
> specification?
> 
> George (gk4)
> 
> 
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to lsb-test-request@lists.linuxbase.org
> with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email listmaster@lists.linuxbase.org