[lsb-discuss] Version number on LSB 3.1 base package?

Wichmann, Mats D mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Fri Jun 27 05:51:44 PDT 2008


> (Incidentally, we're trying an incremental approach, using
> an lsb dependency to replace a bunch of explicit dependencies...
> but keeping a few explicit dependencies that the lsb doesn't cover.
> I know this isn't fair dinkum, but I suspect it will work in practice.
> Perhaps it should be supported, as it provides an incentive
> for ISVs to start using the LSB for *something* even though it
> doesn't cover all the interfaces they need yet.)

I always figured this approach would find *some* traction. For
a while we were talking about a program called "Requires LSB"
which is as you describe - the idea was, you can't be LSB Certified
because you're using other stuff but you knock off the base in
one go, and then tell us about what else you needed so we can
add those to our statistics on what else is important.  Note
that now we have a lot of that data captured via scans of various
apps presented through the LSB Navigator.




More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list