[lsb-discuss] Wording proposal regarding modules.

Mats Wichmann mats at wichmann.us
Wed Mar 19 15:38:54 UTC 2014

On 03/19/14 08:26, Robert Schweikert wrote:
> Maybe I am in left field but here it goes:

I don't think it's left field at all.

> """"
> The LSB exposes modules to allow software to depend on specific parts of
> the LSB rather than on "everything at once." Each module contains a
> subset of LSB libraries that as a whole comprise the LSB. The
> modularization allows, for example applications with no graphical
> interface to only depend on LSB-Core and thus allowing users of this
> application to install only the LSB-Core module on the machine that
> hosts the application.
> An application can be LSB certified if all external interfaces used by
> the application are satisfied in any one of the LSB modules. The
> application dependencies should then be specified accordingly.
> A distribution must provide all interfaces specified as being part of
> the LSB in order to be LSB certified. The distribution may at it's
> choice expose the LSB modules through packages or may decide to provide
> the LSB interfaces as one package. In any event the distribution
> packaging system must resolve the following dependency names:
> lsb
> lsb-core
> lsb-desktop
> lsb-imaging
> lsb-rtlanguages
> The lsb package may be a meta package that simply requires all
> lsb-MODULE packages, it must exist.
> The table below outlines the relation of individual libraries to the LSB
> module names.
> .......
> """"""

the thing we need to sort out is how to describe the languages part,
which does have required content, and it goes well beyond the two
required libraries, in requiring "perl" (with some modules) and "python"
(with some modules).

beyond that, the code already exists to map libraries -> module as the
tables for that module appear in the four current books:


> This should be in a "book" that is independent of any given module book
> or needs to be in the introductory section of each module book. I would
> favor on module independent book.

It shouldn't be too hard to put that together.  I agree the current
model of seemingly treating the modules as completely independent of
each other doesn't give any guidance on assembling a full LSB, so
perhaps an overview book is the right approach.  I'll wait for further
comment before thinking about the easiest way to produce one.

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list