Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
* Les Mikesell [12/11/2008 21:26] :
> I thought the point of LSB was to make it possible to provide a working
> program independently from any distribution's packaging system quirks.
[ I'm having trouble parsing the above sentence. ]
The point of the LSB is to enable third-party vendors to make a
LSB-compliant binary package and ensure it runs on any LSB-compliant
Linux distribution. It won't be integrated as well as a
distribution-specific package but it will work.
Does the LSB demand that program be encapsulated in
distribution,version-specific packages before it can work? If it does, I
don't see much advantage over having to build in every
distribution,version environment in the first place. And if not, then
how is it supposed to know about the dependencies you mentioned.
> At least that's the only reason I see to care about it at
all. If it
> just duplicates things packaging systems already do, why bother?
Search me...
A while back, I became convinced that the LSB was a conspiracy to get
all the people interested in running closed-source software on GNU/Linux
distributions involved in a project that
a) required vast amounts of time and energy to run and
b) was doomed to fail,
thus minimizing the harm they could do. I haven't seen anything since
then that would make me change my mind.
I have to agree that so far the LSB appears to be aimlessly moving
things around - but I don't see why that would have to be the case if
someone actually wanted programs to run.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com