Re: Some questions on the LSB build environment

In message <[email protected]>, Mike Hearn <[email protected]>
writes
>> BTW the LSB brand is, from what I can tell,
>> oriented around zero external dependencies simply because
>> that's the only way to be really bulletproof.  If you
>> run into trouble because you're doing something different,
>> please don't blame the LSB... I'd hate for anyone to
>> think the LSB was flaky because a rebel used the LSB
>> libraries and tools in a way not intended by the authors
>> of the LSB.

Spot on ...
>
>A rebel? Not sure if that's good or bad.....
>
>No, don't worry, if zero dependancies is the rule, then clearly I'm not going
>to claim the apps are LSB compliant, because they're not. If I was to mention
>the LSB at all, it'd be in the sense of "and to avoid problems with symvers in
>glibc, you can use these tools which the LSB project has kindly written",
>something like that.

I'm hoping that LSB 2 will specify a way of checking what's on the
system. But that's a thoroughly complicated kettle of fish. For example,
as soon as you start dealing with C++, you need to know what version of
gcc was used to ensure compatibility...
>
>By the way, does anybody know what happened to the LSB taskforces on universal
>packaging?

1, 2 and 3? I suspect they faded away with the release of LSB 1.0.
Certainly traffic on all the various lists seems a bit sporadic...

Cheers,
Wol
-- 
Anthony W. Youngman <[email protected]>
'Yings, yow graley yin! Suz ae rikt dheu,' said the blue man, taking the 
thimble. 'What *is* he?' said Magrat. 'They're gnomes,' said Nanny. The man 
lowered the thimble. 'Pictsies!' Carpe Jugulum, Terry Pratchett 1998
Visit the MaVerick web-site - <http://www.maverick-dbms.org> Open Source Pick