Re: [opensuse-factory] libjpeg-turbo
On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 18:06 -0300, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
El 04/11/10 17:53, Andrew Jorgensen escribió:
On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 21:16 +0100, Dirk Müller wrote:
On Thursday 04 November 2010, Pavol Rusnak wrote:
It seems only Arch and openSUSE have 8.0, all of the rest uses v6 or libjpeg-turbo.
Thats correct, mainly due to LSB requirements, which we chose to ignore.
I'm going to recommend that we stop ignoring LSB requirements.
Oh really ? the LSB is non-sense. what good reasons ?
At the risk of repeating myself: This pixbuf loader bug is just one example. The LSB exists to make it possible to run proprietary products on any LSB-compliant linux distro. And despite the tunnel-vision open source enthusiasts sometimes have there are a many important and useful proprietary products out there. When we fail to run some product that someone needs they go to Fedora or Ubuntu because the OS is irrelevant to the vast majority of customers. The only thing that matters is what the customer wants to /do/ with the OS. I realize that in some cases LSB fails to accomplish this goal but in this case it would have succeeded as it does in many cases. If you feel that LSB is failing to accomplish this in some way please step up and help give them constructive suggestions as to how it could be accomplished better. In the real world there will always be proprietary products and /we/ are better off if those products can run smoothly on our favorite distro. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
El 04/11/10 18:36, Andrew Jorgensen escribió:
I realize that in some cases LSB fails to accomplish this goal but in this case it would have succeeded as it does in many cases.
Sure, with jewels like http://ldn.linuxfoundation.org/lsb/porting-lsb-demo and some incantation you will be able to run the application, just by FSM's grace ;) That example goes as far as recommending (!) static linking to "increase the portability" of the application.. security and mainteniance disaster ensued.. not to mention memory/disk space usage.. Now, that example isnt going to work in openSUSE, we have ensured such insanity will fail miserably ;)
If you feel that LSB is failing to accomplish this in some way please step up and help give them constructive suggestions as to how it could be accomplished better.
Making it an standard *API* definition instead of an ABI would make me remove the label of "insanity" from it. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
Am Freitag, 5. November 2010, 00:26:41 schrieb Cristian Rodríguez:
If you feel that LSB is failing to accomplish this in some way please step up and help give them constructive suggestions as to how it could be accomplished better.
Making it an standard *API* definition instead of an ABI would make me remove the label of "insanity" from it.
"The LSB is designed to be binary compatible and produce a stable ABI for ISVs." The vendors want binary compability and the users want to use that stuff, so call this insane how you want, this is just the way it's going to stick around for quite some time. Regards, Karsten -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
El 04/11/10 21:20, Karsten König escribió:
"The LSB is designed to be binary compatible and produce a stable ABI for ISVs."
Nowdays, there are tools for ISVs to build their software against all popular linux distributions, the OBS being a quite powerful one.
The vendors want binary compability and the users want to use that stuff, so call this insane how you want, this is just the way it's going to stick around for quite some time.
Sure, dead horses can be beaten Ad líbitum ;) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, 4 Nov 2010, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
Nowdays, there are tools for ISVs to build their software against all popular linux distributions, the OBS being a quite powerful one.
You are not dealing a with ISVs a lot, are you? (Hint: they usually do one, just one, build per architecture for all Linux distributions, right now either on SLE 10 or RHEL 4, then running on these two or later versions.) Gerald -- Dr. Gerald Pfeifer <gp@novell.com> Director Product Management, SUSE Linux Enterprise, openSUSE, Appliances
On Thursday 04 November 2010 22:36:13 Andrew Jorgensen wrote:
On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 18:06 -0300, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
El 04/11/10 17:53, Andrew Jorgensen escribió:
On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 21:16 +0100, Dirk Müller wrote:
On Thursday 04 November 2010, Pavol Rusnak wrote:
It seems only Arch and openSUSE have 8.0, all of the rest uses v6 or libjpeg-turbo.
Thats correct, mainly due to LSB requirements, which we chose to ignore.
I'm going to recommend that we stop ignoring LSB requirements.
Oh really ? the LSB is non-sense. what good reasons ?
At the risk of repeating myself: This pixbuf loader bug is just one example.
The LSB exists to make it possible to run proprietary products on any LSB-compliant linux distro. And despite the tunnel-vision open source enthusiasts sometimes have there are a many important and useful proprietary products out there. When we fail to run some product that someone needs they go to Fedora or Ubuntu because the OS is irrelevant to the vast majority of customers. The only thing that matters is what the customer wants to /do/ with the OS.
LSB requires that certain libraries are available, it does not require that the complete system is using them. The case we have here were two instances of one library end in the same binary is IMO not covered in the LSB - at least not the last time I looked.
I realize that in some cases LSB fails to accomplish this goal but in this case it would have succeeded as it does in many cases.
If you feel that LSB is failing to accomplish this in some way please step up and help give them constructive suggestions as to how it could be accomplished better. In the real world there will always be proprietary products and /we/ are better off if those products can run smoothly on our favorite distro.
Andrew, I think you have a different opinion what LSB does than I do. I have been involved in the past with LSB and would be surprised if recently they changed in a way you implied. If any of my comments above is wrong, I'd like to see facts (references), Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org
participants (5)
-
Andreas Jaeger -
Andrew Jorgensen -
Cristian Rodríguez -
Gerald Pfeifer -
Karsten König