This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [Lsb-wg] opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1

From: Alan Cox <alan at lxorguk dot ukuu dot org dot uk>
To: Matt Taggart <taggart at carmen dot fc dot hp dot com>
Cc: Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org, anderson at freestandards dot org, lsb-wg at freestandards dot org
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 23:19:51 +0100
Subject: Re: [Lsb-wg] opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1
References: <20040729111335.57e712fd.bkoz@redhat.com> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0407291552020.21442@trantor.stuart.netsweng.com> <20040730111823.6a7cb289.bkoz@redhat.com> <20040730183253.9C67F37D8D@carmen.fc.hp.com>

On Gwe, 2004-07-30 at 19:32, Matt Taggart wrote:
> The LSB doesn't create standards, it only documents existing standards 
> created by the community, so the LSB release schedule is dependent on the 
> community's schedule. So it's not our fault :)

There is no compiler implementing the proposed LSB C++ ABI currently in
existance. So how are you not creating the standard ?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Lsb-wg] opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1
  - From: Matt Taggart

References:
- opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1
  - From: Benjamin Kosnik
- Re: [Lsb-wg] opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1
  - From: anderson
- Re: [Lsb-wg] opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1
  - From: Benjamin Kosnik
- Re: [Lsb-wg] opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1
  - From: Matt Taggart

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]