[lsb-discuss] New appchk ready for evaluation
rajesh.banginwar at intel.com
Fri Nov 3 09:38:36 PST 2006
I think we should release this binary as non-lsb. That way user can run
it on any platform without worrying about the right runtime loader being
there... Few times, I have had to tell them about creating a soft link
as the platform was not lsb compliant.
>From: lsb-discuss-bounces at lists.freestandards.org
>[mailto:lsb-discuss-bounces at lists.freestandards.org] On Behalf
>Of Jeff Licquia
>Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 8:17 AM
>To: lsb-discuss at lists.freestandards.org
>Subject: [lsb-discuss] New appchk ready for evaluation
>We'e discussed here and on the calls about enhancements to lsbappchk.
>The first iteration of those enhancement is now available.
>A standalone LSB-compliant binary is here:
>Source code is here, if you'd rather compile your own:
>There are two new major features implemented in this version:
> - By default, appchk will not write a journal. Instead, it will write
>a text report detailing the problems it found, including embedded URL
>links to the Developer Network. Journal writing (exactly as
>be turned on with -j.
> - It is possible to add whole directories containing libraries used by
>the application with the -D or --shared-libpath parameters. The
>directories can be specified using the same format as the PATH
>environment variable: one or more directories, separated by semicolons.
>All libraries found in those directories will be tested as if they had
>been specified with -L<library>. The environment variable
>LSB_SHAREDLIBPATH is equivalent to -D on the command line.
>The report format should be considered a proposal, not a final
>so if it doesn't work for you, please propose enhancements and/or
>alternatives. The same is true for the URLs in the report; they do not
>work yet, because I don't want to commit the LDN people to something
>without feedback from them.
>lsb-discuss mailing list
>lsb-discuss at lists.freestandards.org
More information about the lsb-discuss