[lsb-discuss] Thinking about future LSB features
Wichmann, Mats D
mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Wed Feb 25 07:21:22 PST 2009
Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 02:43:20PM +0100, Dalibor Topic wrote:
>> Wichmann, Mats D wrote:
>>> What would make LSB more useful to you?
>> A library to query and interact with native packaging formats and
>> tools, that's not specific to RPM, deb, etc.
>> The subject of a bunch of flamewars in the packaging world lately has
>> been the poor integration of, say, Ruby gems, into native packaging.
>> As it is, it's pretty hard to bolt on vertical metadata graphs onto
>> existing ones in the distributions without forcing users to learn
>> different tools - that creates all kinds of fascinating conflict and
>> failure points.
> Have you looked at PackageKit? http://www.packagekit.org/
> It sounds like it solves a number of the problems that you have in
> mind. I'm not sure it's quite ready for LSB standardization, but the
> first question is whether it's a good match with the problems you
> have in mind.
I think we ought to watch PackageKit carefully, as it looks like
it will provide *some* of what we've been asked about. At the
moment the PackageKit API is not stable (the authors say so: there's
no promise of complete API stability until 1.0.0), and in an informal
discussion on irc the other day it was noted it's not well accepted
in the debian variants, not least because it follows the rpm
design philosophy of allowing zero interaction during the install
process. There's a lot of resistance within Ubuntu, it looks like -
I'm reading stuff where Ubuntu people consider the PackageKit UI
More information about the lsb-discuss