On 07/06/2020 00:33, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 04:04:33PM +0100, Simon Hobson wrote:
>> While upgrading a system to Beowulf, I noticed this in the changelogs.
>> Is this one of those "it was fizzling out anyway so no big deal" things, or another policy change by Debian ? Not really bothered, just curious.
>
> LSB was a project by some RPM-based distributions, and was never strongly
> followed by Debian. And, it's dead now -- the last upstream release was
> on June 3, 2015.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Standard_Base#Limitations_on_Debian


>>> lsb (9.20150826) unstable; urgency=low
>>>
>>> This update drops all lsb-* compatibility packages, and is therefore an
>>> abandon of the pursuit of LSB compatibility for Debian. Only lsb-release and
>>> lsb-base are kept as they continue to be used throughout the archive.
>
> Note the date. You're mentioning a change that's 5 years old, much
> predating Stretch and Buster.
>
> What's left in Debian are bits that are actually used by some programs.


Such as the LSB headers in init scripts?

Some SysV init maintainers have very strict opinions on those headers,
considered a language for the insserv "compiler". They horrified at the idea
that a sysadmin could still manually number some links in rc?.d, thereby
rejecting the idea of stable renumbering in order to keep existing order where
possible (fix-init).


Best
Ale
--