RE: distro name

["Wichmann, Mats D" <mats d wichmann intel com>]

>> Why not use lsb?
>
>Because it is a package with a huge list of dependencies which are
>unneeded on minimal systems?

Rather sadly, we've seen the distro "keystone" for LSB
be "everything you need to pass the LSB test suite"
which is not identical to "required for LSB runtime".
At one level I understand the benefit of recreating the
environment that was used to test, but it does lead to
additional dependencies. As examples of extra stuff, 
some or all of Perl, Python, Expect may need to be 
present to run LSB tests, but are not  required for
an LSB runtime.

That wasn't really the intent, the LSB runtime requirements
are actually relatively light at this point as compared
to a typical default installation of Linux (one might
argue about the X11 stuff in some cases), but they way 
they implement this is completely up to the distributions.
One might hint to them that this causes issues....

Mats
(from the LSB project)