Re: Wake Up and Smell the Coffee It's Not 1970!
I personally believe that layering the LSB is a **good thing**, however (there is
always a however) the trap is that if you create to many layers, the possible
combinations of layers means that you don't have a standard at all, and your back
to square one. Layering can work if it is kept to two or three layers at most.
Phil
mats.loman@home.se wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Mar 2000, Greg Hayes wrote:
>
> > >
> > > We should have a base LSB spec which excludes X to let handhelds and other
> > > embedded applications be LSB compliant.
> > >
> > > Erik
> > >
> >
> > Won't the handhelds use X to draw to the display?
> >
> > Gregory Hayes
> > -
> >
> >
> >
>
> Perhaps its a good idea to have a number of standard packets instead of
> one standard base. I meand LSB - level 1 may include the very basic set
> ( maybe just kernel and libc + some other very lowlevel stuff ). Level 2
> adds a little more and so on.
>
> Then when a software developer can look too the specs and decide wich
> level his application reuires. The linux distributors can have options in
> their installation to install up to a certain level.
>
> Well this is just a thougth....
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to lsb-discuss-request@lists.linuxbase.org
> with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email listmaster@lists.linuxbase.org
Reply to: