Re: Re: Linux Core Consortium
Joey Hess wrote (on debian-devel):
> My experience as a developer who's tried to write
> an app to use the LSB (only the init script interface)
> is that it's poorly enough specified and/or implemented
> divergently within the spec to the point that I had to
> test my implementation on every LSB distriution I
> wanted to support, and might as well have written
> distro-specific code in the first place.
I got pointed here, I'm not on debian-devel, so I'm
coming a little late to the thread.
It's kind of ironic: the LSB doesn't want to invent new
stuff, just standardize existing best practice. One of
the VERY few places where we were forced to do something
exactly because there was so much divergence was this
initscript area, and of course it's been the source of a
number of problems completely out of proportion to the
size of the topic, reinforcing why we really don't want
to be in the "invent" business - I guess we'll leave
that to HP :-)
Unfortunately, while we got spec contribution in this
area, we didn't get matching code contributions: tests
OR sample implementation. It sure would be helpful to
get either or both, and also helpful would be bugreports
at bugs.linuxbase.org when it doesn't work right.
The takeaway: if the LSB is going to succeed as the
community standard for the Linux core, we need as much
of the community as possible to let us know how it's
working, and when it's not.
-- mats wichmann
P.S.: turnabout being fair play, I think lsb-related
activities have turned up a disproportionate number
of issues in alien and the now-orphaned rpm...