[lsb-discuss] LSB sample implementation

Robert Schweikert Robert.Schweikert at abaqus.com
Wed Aug 2 09:32:25 PDT 2006

On Wed, 2006-08-02 at 08:08 -0700, Wichmann, Mats D wrote:
> >This one was briefly touched at the f2f in Boston. The basic premise
> >here is to create a build environment that assures that non LSB
> >interfaces are not picked up by accident.
> >
> >I envision this as a rudimentary distribution which could be 
> >set up on a machine which builds the application in question. 
> >The distribution could be provided as an ISO. Other options 
> >could be instructions, similar to Linux From Scratch (LFS) 
> >on howto create such a rudimentary distribution. A third 
> >option might be a document which provides instruction on how
> >to turn a SUSES and/or RedHat system into such a build environment.
> >
> >I understand that FSG is not interested in creating a competing
> >distribution and that there are many issues surrounding such "feature".
> >However, I think this could be accomplished without creating a
> >maintenance nightmare and without stepping into the competing
> >distribution realm.
> I don't quite remember this discussion (I was on the phone
> only), but we have such a thing.
> There are two development kits:
> - a set of tools that include lsbcc, etc.

I have not looked at these scripts to figure out how one can use a
different compiler than gcc/g++. If this is easily possible this might
be a solution.

> - a complete set, designed to be used as a chroot (lsb-buildenv)

not sure how we could utilize this in an automated fashion when the
build is triggered automatically from a remote machine. I also thought
chroot required root access.

> The latter is what you are asking about, although it's missing
> the final bits to make it useful as a bootable entity.
> And as John has pointed out, this is something we have to
> tread very carefully with so that the word "reference"
> doesn't creep in to the discussion: this is "a way to
> do things", it is not "the" way or the "reference" way.

Yes, there is the "competing distribution" and "reference distribution"
issue which would certainly have to be avoided in some way shape or
form. The FSG certainly should not get into the distribution business,

Thus let me post the problem as a question.

How can the FSG provide an LSB environment that allows application
vendors to automatically build their applications without using the GCC
compilers and without root access such that inadvertant inclusion of non
LSB interfaces triggers a compile or link error?

> Mats
> P.S. buildenv is in beta, not released, for 3.1 (not least
> because with zero feedback so far, we don't yet have the
> confidence that it's right).  There is a released copy for 3.0.
Robert Schweikert                   MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
(Robert.Schweikert at abaqus.com)                 LINUX
Phone : 401-276-7190
FAX : 401-276-4408

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list