[lsb-discuss] Thoughts on LSB ISO standard

Robert Schweikert rjschwei at suse.com
Mon Jul 30 23:51:46 UTC 2012

On 07/26/2012 08:46 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> My personal opinion is that it would be good to also cover desktop elements.
>> We do not need to follow POSIX scope. We are on top of POSIX anyway.
> Wouldn't this mean that a server system, which doesn't have any desktop components
> could never be LSB compliant?

No, a distribution that certifies for LSB 5.0 must supply, i.e. have 
available, all modules of the LSB. The LSB does not require that all 
components be installed on any given system. However, the tools provide 
methods for an ISV to query a system whether or not the required LSB 
components for the application are installed.

> I don't know how LSB 5.0 intends to solve the "multiple different certifications"
> problem other than issuing multiple standards and certifying one system with
> multiple standards.

LSB certifies a distribution or application, any individual system may 
be composed as the sysadmin of that system sees fit. For example it is 
perfectly reasonable to find two systems that both run the same LSB 
certified distribution and LSB certified applications (not the same 
applications) that have different packages installed. Simply because 
application A on system A requires different LSB modules than 
application B running on system B. This is in the 5.0 world. In the LSB 
4.1 world LSB will pull in everything ans thus system A and B in the 
previous example would be more similar from an installed package 


Robert Schweikert                           MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
SUSE-IBM Software Integration Center                   LINUX
Tech Lead
rjschwei at suse.com
rschweik at ca.ibm.com

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list