[lsb-discuss] LSB apps on non-LSB distros (was Re: application certification questions)

Ian Murdock imurdock at imurdock.com
Sat Mar 3 06:48:34 PST 2007


On 3/5/07, Robert Schweikert <robert.schweikert at abaqus.com> wrote:
> I say the app installer does not need to be LSB compliant. It is the
> ISVs responsibility to check for system requirements. Even if an app is
> not LSB certified they will probably check at least the glibc version
> and a few other things here and there. Every app has some requirements
> and ISVs do not let users install their app any which way the user
> pleases. If there is no checking a user might try to install and app
> build on a newer distro on a really old distro like RedHat 5 (not a
> typo, I do NOT mean RHEL 5).
>
> Yes, I know this recreates the problem of testing on many distributions,
> but it's just the installer and not the whole application. The other
> approach of course is to have a java, python, or perl based installer.

Agreed that the installer should be able to do these checks (and that
we need to make clearer that compliant apps don't HAVE to be shipped
as RPMs). However, it's currently possible to allow installers to do the
checks without dropping the LSB compliance requirement. /bin/sh, for
example, could be used for an LSB compliant installer. Same goes for Python
and Perl as of 3.2, and Java as soon as we can convince one of
the Java runtime vendors to LSB certify so LSB certified apps can bundle it

This doesn't make it any easier for ISVs to deal with the "LSB app on
non-LSB runtime" problem though. Sure, the ISV could provide two versions
of the app and install the appropriate one depending on the result of the
install time checks; so, I still think the ld-lsb.so shim could be useful.

-ian
-- 
Ian Murdock
317-863-2590
http://ianmurdock.com/

"Don't look back--something might be gaining on you." --Satchel Paige




More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list