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

Wichmann, Mats D mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Thu Mar 4 15:51:59 PST 2010

lsb-discuss-bounces at lists.linux-foundation.org wrote:

>> Oh - maybe we can take a leaf from gentoo. I think it's pretty recent,
>> but they've added an awful lot of meta-packages to do with KDE recently.
>> Can't we define the lsb "packages" as a tree - if you ask for "lsb" you
>> get the lot, but that includes eg "lsb-print", "lsb-mail" etc, and
>> lsb-mail might include "lsb-mail-client", "lsb-mail-server" etc etc.
>> Cheers,
>> Wol
>> --
>> Anthony W. Youngman - anthony at thewolery.demon.co.uk
> If I can expand on this bloat issue, part of being LSB compliant from a
> distribution point of view is ensuring that all of the libraries and
> tools that make up the LSB spec be available, not necessarily installed.
> As we start getting into smaller systems (netbooks, UMPC's, smart
> phones, etc), drive space will be at a premium, especially systems
> running from SSDs.  If an application developer creates an application
> that requires a few specific LSB libraries, it should be up to his
> installation mechanism to at a minimum check for the required libraries
> or, as was the case in several apps I have seen, provide their own LSB
> compliant copies and install them with their app if the distro doesn't
> have it installed. 

To both of these comments, it's certainly possible, and
the easy part is doing it in the LSB spec.  The harder
part is deciding what bits need to be exposed.  And the 
implementation mostly depends on distributions, who not only 
have to add the provides, but have to make sure the internal 
components are sorted the right way based on them.

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list