Re: redhat-lsb not in ExceptionList?

[Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch dell com>]

On Sun, Oct 29, 2006 at 12:36:49PM -0500, Michel Salim wrote:
> Would it make sense to have redhat-lsb installed in mock? My
> understanding is that the LSB specifies files that any Linux system is
> expected to have, so it should not be necessary to have to
> BuildRequire on them.

OS versions that claim to be LSB-certified at a given level may have
those, and they may be provided by a set of RPMs that are not included
in the base distribution.  redhat-lsb "Provides: lsb", so any
LSB-compliant app can "Require: lsb".  LSB is really no different than
any other set of dependencies, except that they aim for wider
cross-distro compatibility.  I don't see a strong reason to put them
in the default buildroot, just buildrequire them if needed at build
time.

Thanks,
Matt

-- 
Matt Domsch
Software Architect
Dell Linux Solutions linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux
Linux on Dell mailing lists @ http://lists.us.dell.com