| Linux Standard Base |
Article Index for Linux |
Website Links For Linux |
Information AboutLinux Standard Base |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT LINUX STANDARD BASE | |
| linux | |
|
According to themselves: The goal of the LSB is to develop and promote a set of standards that will increase compatibility among Linux distributions and enable software applications to run on any compliant system. In addition, the LSB will help coordinate efforts to recruit software vendors to port and write products for Linux. The LSB compliance may be certified for a product by a certification procedure. The certification is carried out by The Open Group in cooperation with The Linux Foundation (merger of the Free Standards Group and the Open Source Development Labs ) The LSB specifies for example: standard Libraries , a number of commands and utilities that extend the POSIX standard, the layout of the File System hierarchy, Run Level s, the printing system, including spoolers such as CUPS and tools like Foomatic and several extensions to the X Window System . VERSION HISTORY
CRITICISM The LSB has been criticized for not taking input from projects, most notably the Debian project, outside the sphere of its member companies. For example, the LSB specifies that software packages should either be delivered as a LSB compliant installer, or (preferably) be delivered in a restricted form of the RPM format. Debian however uses their own format, the Deb package format which predates Rpm . Debian developers argue their format is superior to RPM, and that further changing the underlying package format of a distribution to satisfy the LSB is fairly unrealistic. Debian's package manager and format has capabilities RPM lacks, and vice versa, thus Debian converting to RPM is not simple even if the change was desired. To address this, the standard does not dictate what package format the operating system must use for its own packages, merely that RPM must be supported to allow packages from third-party distributors to be installed on a conforming system. Since Debian already includes optional support for the LSB (at version 1.1 in "woody" and 2.0 in "sarge"), this issue evaporates under closer scrutiny (i.e. the end-user just needs to use Debian's " Alien " program to transform and install the foreign RPM packages in the native package format). This is part of the reason the specified RPM format is a restricted subset- to block usage of untranslatable RPM features. By using alien Debian is LSB-compatible by all practical means, but according to the description of the lsb-package, presence of the lsb-package "does not imply that we believe that Debian fully complies with the Linux Standard Base, and should not be construed as a statement that Debian is LSB-compliant." This theoretical possibility of Debian's non-compliance to LSB might be considered a valid criticism, however slight. Additionally, the compliance test suites have been criticized for being buggy and incomplete- most notably, Ulrich Drepper has criticized the LSB for poorly written tests which can cause incompatibility between LSB-certified distributions when some implement incorrect behavior to make buggy tests work, while others apply for and receive waivers from complying with the tests. He also denounced a lack of application testing, pointing out that testing only distributions can never solve the problem of applications relying on implementation-defined behavior. In other areas the LSB work is less controversial and has been well-received. SEE ALSO EXTERNAL LINKS
|
|
|