[lsb-discuss] Distribution-independent printer driver package --first shot

Wichmann, Mats D mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Mon Feb 5 10:40:08 PST 2007


>I can make an RPM providing the printing-related directories, 
>but which package should own /opt then? This should be corrected in
build 
>environment and sample implementation. We need to somehow conserve the 
>possibility to install software with RPM.

Yes, I this is a bug in the 3.1 buildenv/lsbsi. Unfortunately, it wasn't
caught before release.  The two should either have required directories
owned by "the distribution" or should be using an older rpm that doesn't
break if they're not provided.  These "distributions" (neither is
really a distribution) have the artifact that they're not rpm-based
but need to provide rpm, so since the "system software" has not been
installed through rpm they're now missing some things that rpm is
considering important.  This change in rpm was not detected in time.

>RPM in FC6 does not yet require all directories to be owned by an RPM 
>package. Should we add something to the LSB so that installing 
>with RPM keeps working, also if the distro as the new RPM? Does 
>RPM have a command line switch to get back to the old behavior?

This is a bit contentious.  I don't think there's a switch. rpm
development is proceeding apace and in some places diverging in
details from longstanding practice but only some distros are currently
taking the newest upstreams. There was the announcement in Dec.
not too long after the summit in Belin about a new project to
maintain rpm.  I don't want to divert into a separate disucssion
about that.  What needs to happen is we need to get our act
together with the buildenv/lsbsi.  There shouldn't be an
impact on real distributions; if they're rpm-based they'll be
satisfying the expectations of rpm for installation, and if
they're not, it won't come up.




More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list