LSB Package API

[devzero2000]

> On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 11:00 PM, Richard Hughes <hughsient at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 20:02 +0200, Denis Washington wrote:
>> > The distro model is nice (and arguably better than the LSB Package API)
>> > if the packages you like to have are in the repos in sufficiently new
>> > versions. But if you need to go past that (bleeding edge versions, not
>> > widely spread apps), things get more difficult currently. Especially
>> > propietary applications just cannot be distributed by the distros
>> > directly.
>>
>> Right. These packages are compiled against system versions of libraries.
>> Do we choose the F9 or rawhide version of xulrunner to link against?
>> There's substantial API and ABI changes between distro versions for the
>> majority of shared libraries.
>>
>> > I don't think this is a corner case at all. For one thing, propietary
>> > applications might just don't play a role _because_ there is no really
>> > good distribution method for them - the typical chicken-and-egg problem.
>>
>> Incorrect. Most closed-source applications I have to use are installed
>> with an installer binary or script, which just smatters files on the
>> hard drive in /opt. There's just no need to register these with the
>> native system package manager as there are no updates repositories nor
>> dependency tracking required.>
>
>
> You you like an opinion on this, well, that it is mine. For example, look
> ad Oracle Client 11g
> application : it. as released with a tarball or so, have on it:
>
> - a full stack of perl
> - a full stack of shared library : glibc in primisis.
>
> So what have to do un poor packager manager with this ? Disable the deps
> and hope the best. Other, as MQ client, are released with RPM : with deps
> disabled anyway. But not all
> are equal : for example websphere. Sure it is tricky to package it but
> almost don't force me to disable the deps: I DON'T WANT DISABLE THE DEPS.
>
> IMHO, YMMV as usual
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20080623/8522706b/attachment.htm>