Re: LSB1.1: /proc/cpuinfo
> The reason was that "cdrecord dev=xxx ..." won't work because the bit mask
> definitions in ctype.h did change and for this reason, cdrecold by using
> getallargs would assume that dev= is not an option but a file type argument.
SuSE and Red Hat managed to get different glibc 2.0 ones. Thats a somewhat
seperate issue, and thats the kind of thing the LSB is precisely there
to ensure doesn't happen again.
Thats not a compatibility argument so much as a clear explanation of why
the LSB matters