|
|
Log in / Subscribe / Register

SELF: Anatomy of an (alleged) failure

SELF: Anatomy of an (alleged) failure

Posted Jun 23, 2010 23:16 UTC (Wed) by dlang (guest, #313)
In reply to: SELF: Anatomy of an (alleged) failure by RCL
Parent article: SELF: Anatomy of an (alleged) failure

this is exactly what the Linux Standards Base is attempting to do.

unfortunately in practice it just doesn't work. This may be because they don't have sufficient dictatorial powers, but nobody wants to give them that much power ;-)

as for redefining what 'Linux' means, good luck with that windmill.

to post comments

SELF: Anatomy of an (alleged) failure

Posted Jun 23, 2010 23:41 UTC (Wed) by RCL (guest, #63264) [Link]

I think that LSB is not exactly the same, but is much wider in scope - it even dictates the installer. And it is a certification board, not a vendor so it cannot produce/maintain the aforementioned core system.

And overall... well, I'm not going to fight for that binary compatibility. I'm a game developer, sympathetic to Linux, but my target platforms are wildly different.


Copyright © 2026, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds