Re: Updated LSB test suites
Matt Wilson writes:
>
> lsbappchk should be compiled with lsbdev and require only 'lsb >= x.y'
> and the rpmlib internal requirements.
I agree lsbappchk and lsblibchk packages should be compiled with
lsbdev and should also be renamed as you suggest. We'll need to get
appchk and libchk registered with lanana - does anyone know if thats
up an running yet? I havent' been able to reach www.linuxbase.org or
www.lanana.org a few days now.
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.
btw /bin/sh seems to end up being a requirement for
lsb-distribution-test even with AutoReqProv set to 'no'. Is there any
way to remove this requirement (lsb will fulfill it)?
Chris
--
cyeoh@au.ibm.com
IBM OzLabs Linux Development Group
Canberra, Australia
> Should we clean up the lsb package namespace by always using a -?
> Currently we have lsbappchk, lsb-distribution-test, and lsblibchk. I
> would suggest lsb-appchk and lsb-libchk.
>
> lsb-distribution-test needs to have Requires: lsb >= 1.1 (it won't run
> without lsb runtime)
>
> [msw@sid ls]$ rpm -qpR lsblibchk-1.1.1-1.i386.rpm
> rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
> rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
> ld-linux.so.2
> libc.so.6
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0)
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3)
>
> ditto appchk.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Matt
Reply to: