[lsb-discuss] Adding dependency on "lsb" causes huge downloads

Craig Scott audiofanatic at gmail.com
Fri Feb 26 14:36:48 PST 2010



On 02/27/2010 06:25 AM, Daniel Harrison wrote:
> The result is a compromise which sounds sort of like the discussion: if
> you want to be fully LSB compliant, install the metapackage. If you want
> just one application, install what you actually want, and let the
> application dependency checking pull just what it needs. Maybe the
> application could also do a simple global check, like looking for the
> LSB version in /etc/lsb-release, and then assume the libraries it needs
> are LSB compliant.
>    
You normally make your package require the lsb metapackage because then 
you know you are getting an LSB-compliant version of it. If you just 
depend on the specific package you want, there's no guarantee that 
specific package is binary compatible (eg it won't necessarily have been 
built with the same compiler as required by the LSB). The package 
requirements give you two-for-one, the packages you want as well as a 
guarantee that they are built in the way you want.

-- 
Craig Scott
Melbourne, Australia



More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list