[Lsb-wg] opposition to LSB 2.0 rc1

[Per Bothner]

Matt Taggart wrote:

> I suspect all of the major runtimes are working on it, but it will be many 
> months until it's widely deployed in releases that developers target.
> ...
> 3.4 doesn't yet meet the LSB criteria, it's blocked on deployment by the 
> runtimes. I believe this is only a matter of time, but waiting for 3.4 
> would delay the addition of c++ by at least 6 months.

I'm confused.  I don't understand how *current* deployment can block
anything for LSB 2.0.  I don't see how current releases can support
LSB 2.0 (except accidentallly), so the whole point is to define the
a requirement for the *next* releases.  So the fact that nobody has
deployed 3.4 yet is irrelevant - hopefully they soon will.

The counter-argument is that binary compatibility goals and testing
make switching to gcc 3.4 something that may not happen quickly.  But
I'm still puzzled why vendors can be expected to switch to LSB 2.0
(which is not out yet) so much quicker than they can switch to Gcc 3.4
(which has been out for 3 months).
-- 
	--Per Bothner
per@bothner.com   http://per.bothner.com/