On 11/16/23 20:39, Tim via users wrote:
On Thu, 2023-11-16 at 18:36 -0800, ToddAndMargo via users wrote:
$ dnf info redhat-lsb-submod-security
Last metadata expiration check: 3:57:51 ago on Thu 16 Nov 2023 02:37:19
PM PST.
Installed Packages
Name : redhat-lsb-submod-security
Version : 4.1
Release : 60.fc38
Architecture : x86_64
Size : 0.0
Source : redhat-lsb-4.1-60.fc38.src.rpm
Repository : @System
From repo : fedora
Summary : LSB Security submodule support
URL : http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/lsb
License : GPLv2
Description : The Linux Standard Base (LSB) Security submodule specifications
: define components that are required to be present on an LSB
: conforming system.
Huh ???? Flew right over my head.
Which bit?
The "Description"
The Linux Standards Base is a bunch of basic things expected to exist
on a system. So software developers have some idea of what they'll
have to work with, what they're expected to support, etc, and try and
standardise things. There's very basic things, such as the barebones
file system directories (/bin, /etc/ and so on) and what purposes
they're supposed to be used for, and there's binary constructs that
actually are the OS and expected support files (you expect to always
have the ls command, for instance).
And as a bit of a sideways example, CUPS was always expected to exist
on a system, even if you don't own a printer. There's some logic to
that, also some illogic to it. Everybody does not have a printer,
everything on a system ought to be able to deal with that, it shouldn't
require an idle printer driving system to be installed.
If you use "rpm -ql redhat-lsb-submod-security" you'll see that it only
contains two files. If you actually look for those files on your
system, you'll may find they're zero byte files (they are on my CentOS
system) that aren't worth caring about.
The presence of those files satisfies some thing that looks for them,
and only cares that they exist. Which, as far as I'm concerned, is a
bit of a dumb test for software to do, but there you are.
If you start up some software from the command line you'll see they
complain about various things not existing, but the program still
starts and runs (a better way to run things). It's simply that those
features aren't available to it, it didn't actually *need* them.
Interestingly, there doesn't appear to be any LSB packages on my
Fedora 36 system:
[tim@fluffy ~]$ rpm -qa \*lsb\*
[tim@fluffy ~]$
What a wonderful write up. Thank you!
Interesting:
$ rpm -ql redhat-lsb-submod-security
/usr/share/lsb/4.1/submodules/security-4.1-amd64
/usr/share/lsb/4.1/submodules/security-4.1-noarch
$ ls -al /usr/share/lsb/4.1/submodules/security-4.1-*
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 0 Jan 19 2023
/usr/share/lsb/4.1/submodules/security-4.1-amd64
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 0 Jan 19 2023
/usr/share/lsb/4.1/submodules/security-4.1-noarch
And they have not been touched since "Jan 19 2023".
Methinks I am just going to remove them and see if
anyone complains.
# dnf remove redhat-lsb-submod-security
Dependencies resolved.
================================================================================
Package Arch Version
Repository Size
================================================================================
Removing:
redhat-lsb-submod-security x86_64 4.1-60.fc38 @fedora
0
Transaction Summary
================================================================================
Remove 1 Package
And there are no dependencies, so here goes.
-T
--
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
