[lsb-discuss] Linux Application Checker impressions
Wichmann, Mats D
mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Fri Aug 8 22:56:52 PDT 2008
> 2) it was delivered as a tarball rather than an LSB package.
> While there's nothing wrong with tarballs, this
> seems like an area where eating your own dogfood
> might be appropriate.
It was discussed; while I generally agree with you this
was a case where (for now) it was considered it could
provide a barrier to entry for people who don't otherwise
have an LSB-conforming distro to use for their testing.
> 3) One of these days it would be sweet if the Linux Foundation
> had its own yum and apt repositories.
We do, although I'm finding information on it not particularly
easy to find.
If you drill down below:
you can find stuff for released packages, and under:
you can find the nightly-build development packages.
I've got apt and yum recipies for these but before
posting them I'll have another hunt for the wiki page
I *thought* we had which describes these.
The application checker is actually several packages,
there might be some benefit to a "task" package which
makes sure all of them are in place.
More information about the lsb-discuss