Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Linux Standard Base Project
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 17:45:58
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Linux Standard Base Project by "Paweł Madej"
1 Pawe³ Madej posted <43342BD3.8000004@××××××××.info>, excerpted below, on
2 Fri, 23 Sep 2005 18:22:43 +0200:
4 > Hello,
5 >
6 > I've found a news that LSB Release3 [1] was announced. So there is my
7 > question. Are Gentoo Foundation and Gentoo Developers developing Gentoo
8 > Linux in coordinance with standards provided by this specification?
9 >
10 > Could someone give me reasons why yes or no?
12 Note that I'm simply a user and in no way speak officially for Gentoo.
13 However, this issue has been of interest to me, so I've some observations
14 on the Gentoo/LSB interaction. Hopefully, however, my reply will save
15 some developer from having to compose one, meaning they can spend the time
16 on doing stuff I don't have the skills for, all those new ebuilds! =8^)
18 No, Gentoo is not, basically because much of the standard only makes sense
19 for binary distributions, not from-source (meta)distributions like Gentoo,
20 and/or for all-at-once release upgrades, not incrementally upgraded as it
21 comes out distributions like Gentoo. Additionally, normal all-at-once
22 releases only have one version of things like KDE installed at a time,
23 where Gentoo slots them, so multiple versions may be installed at the same
24 time without conflicting (very much) with each other. The LSB makes
25 little if any allowance for this sort of thing.
27 Keep in mind that the LSB is really targeted at binary-only products,
28 regardless of what distribution the product is to be run on. If it's
29 available under an open source license, then a distribution can distribute
30 it and manage support of any changes it has to make. Those who refuse to
31 open their source thus face the problem of supporting all the diverse
32 distributions out there, where the distributions would be providing
33 support for at least the differing stuff themselves, if they were given
34 the chance with open source. Thus, it's those closed source vendors who
35 tend to support stuff like the LSB the strongest. (I must say that IMO
36 Gentoo does pretty good with even closed source, tho, considering the
37 number of ebuilds available and supported, to aid in the installation of
38 closed source apps. =8^)
40 All that said, as for any distribution, the closer Gentoo can be to normal
41 FHS locations and the like, the closer it keeps to assumptions made by
42 even open source developers about stuff like lib64 vs lib vs lib32 on
43 hardware that handles dual bitness (like amd64, my arch, therefore my
44 interest in the subject), for instance, the less changes Gentoo devs must
45 make to even open source apps, as compared to upstream. Thus, it makes
46 sense for Gentoo to maintain compatibility where it doesn't conflict too
47 strongly with other Gentoo goals or policies, since being different means
48 more work than abiding by the standard. Gentoo can be and is different
49 where it makes sense to be based on what Gentoo /is/, but it tends to
50 follow pretty closely the defined standards where there's no strong reason
51 /not/ to do so, because it just makes life simpler that way.
53 What this all means in brief is that Gentoo in general abides by the
54 LSB/FHS where doing so doesn't come in conflict with Gentoo's own
55 priorities. Assuming Gentoo users are comfortable with Gentoo and its
56 priorities or they'd be using a different distribution, it will follow
57 that most of them will also be comfortable with how Gentoo treats the LSB,
58 because to treat it differently would mean compromising part of the
59 priorities that help make Gentoo what it is.
61 --
62 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
63 "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
64 and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in
68 --
69 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Linux Standard Base Project "Paweł Madej" <linux@××××××××.info>