This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Lsb-wg] opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1
At 2004/7/31 16:11-0700 Per Bothner writes:
> In fact, it's kind of strange: LSB seems to be trying to define an
> application binary interface (in the general sense, including file
> system standards), for which the choise of kernel should have no
> relevancy (except for marketing). E.g. it seems perfectly reasonable
> for a BSD-based system to support such a standard, except perhaps
> for the unnecessarily polarizing name.
Theoretically, I think believe it would possible for a BSD based
system to be LSB compliant. I don't know of anyone who has tried, and
we won't know for sure until someone does. Certainly we (the LSB)
have not deliberately tried to make it Linux specific, and would avoid
that situation if possible. I haven't really heard of any real
interest from the BSD community to move in that direction (or even
towards FHS compliance).
As for the name - the motivation for the project primarily came from
people who used Linux kernel based systems, and the name ended up
IBM OzLabs Linux Development Group