Re: LSB Commands and Utilities, Draft proposal
Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> "Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo" <email@example.com> writes:
> > 2) Where else should we diverge from UNIX98? Am I missing other things we
> > do differently? Do we try to fix util-linux or just say we do things the
> > util-linux way? Seriously, util-linux has more noncomforming but properly
> > named and proper basic funcionality commands than any other package.
> Maybe on a case by case basis. Can you summarize the problems?
> Perhaps we can fix them. util-linux tends to be BSD-like, while POSIX
> is more SVR4-like.
As Linux becomes more mainstream (read: as companies start sending
money to Red Hat and other Linux distributors and hope to see something
they can use and sell to their customers ...) the need for a UNIX98
brandable version of Linux is going to grow.
Should we view UNIX98 compliance as a long term objective or hope
that the large companies who are infusing cash into Red Hat and others
don't happen to notice that Linux is non-compliant?