[lsb-discuss] LSB conference call (2011-04-27, 11am ET)

[Robert Schweikert]

On 04/30/2011 08:00 AM, Mats Wichmann wrote:
> On 04/29/2011 05:39 PM, Craig.Scott at csiro.au wrote:
>>> Would it help both of your concerns if we provided a tool to report the
>>> minimal set of modules used by a binary?  We could include an option to
>>> format it like a Requires line in a spec file, for those people so
>>> inclined, or provide the list in ways that make it useful in an
>>> installer, product documentation, etc.
>>
>> While it does sound potentially useful, I'm not sure I'd fully trust it. I think I'd prefer to understand the dependencies I expected our software to require and then run some tool to verify that our final package hasn't acquired a dependency on something else. The app checker would seem the logical place for this test to reside, since it already gets used in that package-testing capacity.
>
> I think I'd see both models existing.  That is, if a package does
> declare dependencies, the checker would report on whether they are
> sufficient for the package, so if you think depending on "core" and
> "graphics" is sufficient, you'll hear if it's not.
>
> But then there should also be a reporting option to show the minimum
> dependency set.  You could then at your option, go back and code your
> app to depend on just that set, and in future checks you'd get reports
> on whether that was still sufficient.

+1

Robert

Robert Schweikert                           MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
SUSE-IBM Software Integration Center                   LINUX
Tech Lead
rschweikert at novell.com
rschweikert at ca.ibm.com
781-464-8147