>> Why not use lsb? > >Because it is a package with a huge list of dependencies which are >unneeded on minimal systems? Rather sadly, we've seen the distro "keystone" for LSB be "everything you need to pass the LSB test suite" which is not identical to "required for LSB runtime". At one level I understand the benefit of recreating the environment that was used to test, but it does lead to additional dependencies. As examples of extra stuff, some or all of Perl, Python, Expect may need to be present to run LSB tests, but are not required for an LSB runtime. That wasn't really the intent, the LSB runtime requirements are actually relatively light at this point as compared to a typical default installation of Linux (one might argue about the X11 stuff in some cases), but they way they implement this is completely up to the distributions. One might hint to them that this causes issues.... Mats (from the LSB project) _______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
