Johannes , Matt , Thank you very much for your advices. I'll look through it them.
Koichi Sudo On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 10:27:06AM -0500, Matt Wilson wrote: > What I've done in Red Hat Linux is I think the best approach. I've > added a keystone package called 'redhat-lsb' that requires things on > the system in order to make it LSB compliant. It in turn Provides the > lsb dependency. > > See the binary and source RPMS: > > ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/rawhide/SRPMS/SRPMS/redhat-lsb-1.1.0-0.2.src.rpm > ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/rawhide/i386/RedHat/RPMS/redhat-lsb-1.1.0-0.2.i386.rpm > > Currently I auto-generate the .spec file with some shell scripting. > It would be nice to make the .spec file from the lsb database. > > Feel free to direct any comments to me. > > Cheers, > > Matt > > On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 11:51:13AM +0100, Johannes Poehlmann wrote: > > My understanding is that all lsb compliant packages have a > > "Requires lsb" in their package header (Or require another package, wich > > requires "lsb"). By providing a "lsb" package or explicitly saying > > "Provides lsb" in the header of a installed package > > the package will install (without --nodeps ;-). > > > > Bottom line: > > You can put what you want in a "lsb" package. By having one,you declare > > that your system is ready to get lsb compliant packages installed.
