RE: Linux Core Consortium
>Unfortunally, some distributions don't seem to be willing to do more
>than the minimal changes to adhere to the LSB. I did some patches for
>RedHat - and the bugreport is still open (I don't know whether the
>patches still work).
Failing some required tests seems to be quite a motivator
to at least taking a look. Barring that...
*Officially*, when you certify a distribution to the LSB you're
making a promise about conforming to the spec, and the test suites
serve as an *indicator* of compliance (not proof: if you violate
the spec and nothing in the test suites catch it, you still have
to fix it), but in practice, people implement to pass the tests.
>SUSE seems to try hardest to be LSB complient and Debian was rather
>quick to implement my requests. I had no access to other distributions.
>>Unfortunately, while we got spec contribution in this
>>area, we didn't get matching code contributions: tests
>>OR sample implementation.
>(I think I'm ment with regards to the first two points.) Regarding the
>latter, SUSE's implementation should completely fullfil the LSB
>requirements (tough the init-functions may be a bit SUSE centric)
>whereas Debian's system is also quite ok. (Though start-stop-damon
>doesn't find out that my PERL script damon is running...)
I didn't really mean to single you out, Tobias. There were
a number of other contributors to the initscript spec section
>I agree with Mats that the best way to enforce init script support are
Seems that way.