Re: Testing of lsbdev and sample implementation
On Fri, 30 Nov 2001, Matt Taggart wrote:
>
> Stuart Anderson writes...
>
> > Technically, if rsh isn't a LSB specified command, then it shouldn't be in
> > SI, and an application shouldn't be calling out to it.
>
> Forgive my ignorance, I still don't have everything straight in my head(well
> at least the LSB stuff). Is a "lsb compliant application" allowed to use
> things outside of the LSB?
No, if it's not in the spec, then it can't be assumed to exist.
> It seems like it would be rather limiting if it can't.
Our challenge is to be able to include enough that it isn't limiting.
> So assuming it can,
>
> - If the dependency is a library, is it expected to link statically? I guess
> there's no way of know that library is there or declaring a dependency so I
> would assume you have to go static.
Correct. Static linking removes the dependency at runtime (ie becomes part of
the application itself).
> - If the dependency is a command(like rsh in this case) then what?
Only the commands that are specified can be used. Again, our challenge is
to be able to specify enough to cover most cases.
Stuart
Stuart R. Anderson anderson@metrolink.com
Metro Link Incorporated South Carolina Office
5807 North Andrews Way 129 Secret Cove Drive
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309 Lexington, SC 29072
voice: 954.660.2500 voice: 803.951.3630
http://www.metrolink.com/ XFree86 Core Team
Reply to: