[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: UNIX 98 (Was: Re: Standard libc...)

On Wed, 19 Aug 1998, Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo wrote:

> I hope noone minds, but seeing as I've already projected myself into the
> position, I'm going to declare myself the 'Guy Making Sure That LSB/LCS Is
> UNIX 98 Compliant (GMSTLIUC).'

Gee, I'd thought that was Ian Nandhra's job :-P.

You may have more of a task ahead than you think. There are some elements
of the Single Unix Stsndard -- such as STREAMS -- that will likely be hard
to get pushed into a standard Linux environment (just ask Caldera :-).

Likewise, there are some significant parts of the LSB -- the init-script
system, for instance -- which are considered part of CPU-specific ABI
specs and are thus outside the scope of the SUS. 

The best benefit of a "TOG watchdog" role is, to make sure there are no
gratuitous variations that can be easily fixed, and to document those
differences between the SUS and Linux where they can't be easily

At the LI meeting where the LSB was formed, the issue of standards came
up; the consensus I recall was that strict conformance may not be a goal,
but at very least a detailed exception list is necessary.

(Ie, "the LSB conforms to TOG standards document XYZ except for <list of
specific differences>") 

It was agreed (someone corrent me if I got the
wrong impression) that conformance was desirable but not critical; that
a well-documented list of exceptions between the LSB and SUS would
suffice. I'll gladly offer to help compile that exception list.

- Evan

Reply to: