[Distutils] [pyconuk] "Python Package Management Sucks"

Ben Finney ben+python at benfinney.id.au
Sat Sep 27 01:01:26 CEST 2008


Floris Bruynooghe <floris.bruynooghe at gmail.com> writes:

> Hmm, I've never read the packaging sections of the LSB (and maybe I
> should before making a comment like this)

<URL:http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org/LSB_3.2.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/packagefmt.html>

> but I've always heard complaints that it is very RPM-centric and
> ignores DEBs etc.

The LSB core specification does recommend (and specify the format of)
RPM packages for distribution; but it doesn't require the system to
use RPMs natively, only that such packages should be installable.

    Note: Supplying an RPM format package is encouraged because it
    makes systems easier to manage. This specification does not
    require the implementation to use RPM as the package manager; it
    only specifies the format of the package file.

    <URL:http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org/LSB_3.2.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/swinstall.html>

So, a Debian system is LSB-compliant if it enables the installation of
externally-produced LSB-compliant RPM packages. This is easily done by
making an appropriate tool available; I think 'alien' is the one used
on a Debian system.

The LSB folks have (IMHO as an outside observer) worked quite well
with the Debian project and vice versa. A Debian system now has
various 'lsb-*' packages available that make it simple to bring a
Debian system into compliance with the various specifications of the
LSB (note: I don't know what gaps in compliance may remain even with
those packages installed).

-- 
 \                             “Everything is futile.” —Marvin of Borg |
  `\                                                                   |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney



More information about the Distutils-SIG mailing list