News and views from the Licquia family 2005-12-13T20:59:16Z https://www.licquia.org/archives/2005/06/16/a-new-approach-to-the-lsb-part-2/feed/ WordPress Nathanael Nerode http://www.licquia.org/?p=102#comment-5704 2005-12-13T20:59:16Z 2005-12-13T20:59:16Z Good ideas all. When can we get this into Debian? 😛

]]> Ian Murdock’s Weblog » When is a fork not a fork? http://ianmurdock.com/?p=273 http://www.licquia.org/?p=102#comment-5186 2005-09-15T17:46:32Z 2005-09-15T17:46:32Z […] Of the remaining 29 packages, 4 are the LSB 3.0 compatibility environment, which adds the necessary packages to achieve LSB 3.0 compliance in such a way that the sarge glibc and pam packages don’t need to be modified (these packages needed modifications to achieve LSB 3.0 compliance—see Jeff Licquia’s weblog for details here and here). The only applications that use the LSB compatibility environment are LSB applications—the default application environment is the standard Debian environment. […]

]]> Matt Wilson http://www.licquia.org/?p=102#comment-4683 2005-06-16T21:03:35Z 2005-06-16T21:03:35Z We added the requirement for LSB applications to use ld-lsb.so.1 for PT_INTERP so that a distro can replace ld-lsb.so.1 with a dynamic linker that pulls in LSB-compliant libraries. In other words, this is exactly why it’s required.

]]> spacehunt » Making Debian LSB compliant http://spacehunt.info/?p=5 http://www.licquia.org/?p=102#comment-4682 2005-06-16T18:31:56Z 2005-06-16T18:31:56Z […] SB compliant Filed under: Debian — spacehunt @ 2:30 am Jeff Licquia’s proposal for making Debian LSB compliant is the same one that we&#82 […]

]]>