[lsb-discuss] Is RPM required for LSB compliance?

Wichmann, Mats D mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Tue Nov 28 10:02:48 PST 2006


>Hi list,
>
>Well, this may be a dumb question, but I was reading this page:
>
>http://www.freestandards.org/docs/lsbbook/package.html
>
>and got the impression that, for an application to be LSB-certified, it
>must be packaged and delivered in RPM format.  Is my understanding
>correct?
>
>The application that we're trying to make LSB-certified is currently
>delivered as a tarball, but if LSB requires RPM delivery we would have
>to factor that into our release plan.

rpm package format is currently the *preferred* format, but
not strictly a requirement.

the intent of the rule is this:

to enable delivery of applications onto a conforming system,
they must be provided in a way the receipient can be sure
to able to install

(a) as conforming systems are required to be able to install
lsb (rpm) format packages, using this format meets the requirement

(b) using a combination of tools that are required to be
present on a system, such as tar and/or the shell, meets
the requirement

(c) delivering the installer application along with the
software to be installed, and that installer is itself
made lsb-conforming, meets the requirement

Method (a) is the preferred method because the software
can then be managed by the system's native package manager
in the way that other software is, easing the burden on
administrators




More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list