Fwd: LSB 3.2 Embedded Profile

[ed.reaves@xxxxxxxxxx (Ed Reaves)]

All of Nortel's Linux applications for call processing are "Headless"
and use a CLI. The inclusion of a GUI profile would be a good option.
This would enable the use of CGL in our On Box OAM applications that do
need a GUI. These OAM applications also require ISV certified 3rd party
software like Oracle Enterprise Edition Database, MySQL Database &
IBM-Solid Databases. The CGL profile needs to be LSB compliant so that
these ISV's will certify their application on the CGL profile. We also
require support for JAVA, JBOSS, IBM Websphere, and other 3rd party
applications for our new SOA (Service Oriented Architecture)
applications used for the IPTV product. A GUI profile would be required
for these as well.

I like both CGL and Embedded names for the LSB 3.2 Profile. Could both
be used together. Something like "LSB 3.2 CGL Embedded Profile", or "LSB
3.2 CGL & Embedded Profile" sound good to me.


Regards, 

Ed Reaves 
Platform PLM, Common Engineering 
CTO Office
*E-mail: ed.reaves at nortel.com
*  Phone: (919)905-3911 (ESN 355-3911)


-----Original Message-----
From: lf_carrier-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:lf_carrier-bounces at lists.linux-foundation.org] On Behalf Of
Theodore Tso
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:18 PM
To: MacDonald, Joe
Cc: lf_carrier at lists.linux-foundation.org;
lsb-discuss at lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: Fwd: LSB 3.2 Embedded Profile

On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 01:50:47PM -0700, MacDonald, Joe wrote:
> > + Do the distros that you're LSB 4.0 registering include qt and gtk
> > today?  If so, you wouldn't be able to certify under this profile.
> > Could you please confirm that you're shipping non-GUI distros today.
> 
> Wind River's CGL-registered distros on the market today are CLI-only 
> if you're using our default configurations.

Do you ship a GUI stack at all with your product?  Or is it just that it
isn't installed by "default"?  SuSE doesn't install all of the LSB
required graphical libraries by default either, but doesn't mean that it
can't be LSB certified.

One of the interesting questions in the embedded world is that users
will always strip out any library they don't need, which I think is
perfectly fair.  I would think that it's not reasonable to require
end-users of embedded distributions to install a full LSB stack if it's
not necessary.  If an application needs only a subset of the LSB, and
the OS and the application(s) are going to be frozen in ROM, such as in
the something like the Sony Reader, it doesn't seem necesary to require
that the GUI stack be shipped if it's not necessary.

On the other hand, if the idea that Independent Software Vendors are
going to be installing applications on the platform while it is in the
user's hands, such as might be the case in a Limo or Moglin password,
that's a different story.

So if "embedded" means something like the Sony Reader, and an embedded
distribution is going to be shipping the GUI stack, but the product
designer decides not to install the GUI stack, I don't think that would
be a problem in terms of whether or not the embedded distribution can be
LSB certified or not.

> > + Could you please list some of the most important closed source
> > applications that run on your CGL distros today?  We would like to 
> > pull them into the LSB process and convince them of the value of LSB

> > certifying.
> 
> Obviously the most important closed-source applications are from Wind 
> River, right?  ;-)

Well, the big thing that we're most worried about is __Idependent__
Software Vendor.  If you're just going to shipping your own
closed-source applications with your Linux distro, you don't really need
to use the LSB to ensure interoperability, do you?  :-)

     	    	       	      			   - Ted
_______________________________________________
Lf_carrier mailing list
Lf_carrier at lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lf_carrier