[lsb-discuss] Regarding doubts in LSB support for HPLIP.

Till Kamppeter till.kamppeter at gmail.com
Tue Nov 8 07:51:23 UTC 2011

Sorry for the late answer, I was on the Ubuntu Developer Summit all last 
week. Now I am back and yesterday I have recovered the OpenPrinting web 

I am CCing also the LSB mailing list to get helps from the people who 
are making the LSB framework.

More inline.

On 10/31/2011 05:06 AM, Kumar, Sanjay wrote:
> Hello Till,
> While going forward in making HPLIP as LSB compliant, we have some
> doubts. Please help us in providing the clarification on the same.
> Thanks in advance for all the help.
> 1) LSB package does not contain the latest versions of libraries which
> are LSB compliant.
> e.g LSB compliant *libcupsimage.so* does not contain latest function
> calls, e.g *cupsRasterReadHeader2* function is not present in
> */opt/lsb/lib/libcupsimage.so.2*, however HPLIP makes use of this.

Make sure you use the newest LSB (4.1).

> 2) Following shared libraries are not present which are needed by HPLIP.
> a) libnetsnmp.so
> b) libcrypto.so
> c) libdbus.so
> d) libusb.so
> e) libcups.so (present but very old version)
> f) libcupsimage.so (present but very old version)

Make sure you use LSB 4.1 and if the libraries are too old or still 
missing, link the desired ones statically.

> Is there any plan/update on having LSB compliant versions of these
> libraries from the vendors? Because if the package is statically linked
> with 3rd party libraries then package will lose the advantage of using
> always latest library.

The distribution vendors do not issue LSB packages of additional libraries.

You get an LSB-compliant package if you link the libraries statically. 
If the package once works it is not a big problem if the statically 
linked libraries are not the newest ones. The communication protocols 
provided by the libraries do not change so quickly, and as you issue a 
new driver version every 2-3 months, you can make the new version's LSB 
package always with updatyed statically linked libraries.

> 3) Sometimes 3^rd party latest libraries cannot be built in LSB
> environment (lsbcc etc), e.g latest version of *libdbus* (1.0.8) failed
> tobuilt with lsbcccompiler. Only (0.1.12) version could be built with
> lsbcc, just in case we want to link it statically.

Can someone from the LSB developers help here, so that the HPLIP 
developers get libdbus 1.0.8 built under LSB?

> 4) LSB looks mostly to be a coding/building standard. Does it assure
> same quality on all distro’s (particularly, from different vendors)?

Can someone of the LSB developers answer this? Thanks.

> 5) The major differences we see across distro’s are in CUPS, GS, etc
> which are not LSB compliant and which are being used heavily by HPLIP.
> Many issues are caused because of these components like *GS versions
> (e.g versions 9.00 and 8.71). So *how much LSB would help us
> in reducing testing efforts and how safe is this to skip testing of HPLIP on
> every LSB compliant distribution?

Can someone of the LSB developers answer this, too? Thanks.


More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list