LSB 3.2 Embedded Profile

[tytso@xxxxxxx (Theodore Tso)]

On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 05:11:06PM -0700, Dan Kohn wrote:
> The purpose of this new profile is for Carrier Grade Linux
> distributions, which are required to pass the LSB as part of
> registering as CGL 4.0 compliant.

Something we should think about very clearly when we create new
profiles is not only which set of distributions are likely to certify
against that profile, but what set of ISV's and end-users will likely
benefit from the certification.

I think we need more of a reason than just to allow distro's to pass a
LSB certification.  More importantly, is what ISV's are likely to
certify their application against such a profile.  After all,
interoperability of applications against distro's is the whole point
of the LSB, so for each profile we need to understand what sort of
applications are the target for said profile.  That would help inform
us about what libraries need to be included, or left out.  This is
particularly true since Cal was telling me that Montavista's CGL
product includes all of the desktop libraries, since some users of CGL
need it for graphical config tools, etc.

Maybe other CGL products don't want to include the graphical desktop
libraries, which is fair, but that leads to the question of what
libraries they might or might not need in the future, and what
business and technical goals led CGL to require LSB certification in
the first place.  

At least in the Mobile space, I have a pretty good understanding for
Moglin, et. al., why an LSB profile would add value, and that it makes
easier to understand what things to include and not include in a
hypothetical Moglin profile.  It's less to clear to me what an
"embedded" or "CGL" profile would be used for, and which ISV's would
create applications under such a profile for an embedded or CGL
profile.

Regards,

					- Ted