This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [Lsb-wg] opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1
- From: Jim Kingdon <kingdon at panix dot com>
- To: jsm at polyomino dot org dot uk
- Cc: anderson at freestandards dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org,libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org, lsb-wg at freestandards dot org
- Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 02:57:01 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: [Lsb-wg] opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org><Pine.LNX.email@example.com><firstname.lastname@example.org><Pine.LNX.email@example.com><Pine.LNX.firstname.lastname@example.org><Pine.LNX.email@example.com> <Pine.LNX.firstname.lastname@example.org>
> the draft seems to specify enough (complete with strfry, the
> standardization of which can surely serve no other purpose) to . . .
Not to distract people from the main flamewar, but I've submitted this
one as a bug in the LSB:
To make a long story short, in the early days of the LSB there was
often a fair bit of confusion/randomness about which GNU extensions to
include and which ones not. Some of this has been cleaned up
(e.g. command options - a lot were deprecated in LSB 1.3 and removed
in 1.9), but other parts haven't gotten as much attention.