[lsb-discuss] Bug#714634: Clarification of general LSB requirements

Didier 'OdyX' Raboud odyx at debian.org
Thu Jul 11 06:22:07 UTC 2013


Le mercredi, 10 juillet 2013 20.20:21, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 02:10:22AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > (It's probably also worth noting that Debian does not claim LSB
> > compliance and the description of that Debian package states,
> > rather prominently: "The intent of this package is to provide a
> > best current practice way of installing and running LSB packages
> > on Debian GNU/Linux.  Its presence does not imply that Debian
> > fully complies with the Linux Standard Base, and should not be
> > construed as a statement that Debian is LSB-compliant." So,
> > really, it's kind of hard to see what's notably egregious about
> > this.)
> 
> Well, I think that package description is silly in its lawyeresque
> weaselness.  The raison d'être of the package is to provide an
> LSB-compliant layer, which is what it means to support installing
> and running LSB packages.  I don't see any reason the package
> description should have this long disclaimer about the possibility
> of bugs in the implementation.

The core of what this phrasing [0] conveys is "this package doesn't 
imply that Debian is LSB-compliant but is our best-effort at it"; I 
would welcome any patch in that direction, if possible acked by 
Jeff/LSB.

Cheers,

OdyX

[0] Which apparently has been that was at least since 2002 for the LSB 
1.1.0-11 package.


More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list