Re: Thread deficiencies
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 21:52:04 -0500
From: Jim Knoble <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Perhaps i'm misremembering, but i was under the impression that the
consensus at the LSB spec meeting in New York last month was the
(1) Specify clone(), in particular because it's used by Apache.
There was some disagreement about this, in particular because it might
cause heartburn for certain Linux emulators (i.e., SCO, NetBSD, etc.).
I personally don't think that making it hard for non-Linux systems that
are trying to emulate Linux so that they can run LSB application is
*our* problem, but there were some people that did have this concern.
This might have been partially addressed by the proposal that we specify
clone() with a specific (limited) flags combination (to be determined
(2) Put pthreads in an `annex' to the spec, with descriptions of how
it differs from POSIX.4 (i.e., doesn't work).
For the short term, yes. There was however a strong feeling that a
number of applications *will* want to use POSIX.4, and so saying that
such apps couldn't be LSB compliant might not necessarily be the right