[lsb-discuss] LSB 3.2 Embedded Profile

[Joe.MacDonald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (MacDonald, Joe)]

On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 10:05 -0400, Jeff Licquia wrote:

> Carlos Manuel Duclos Vergara wrote:
> > Now that I reread this, shouldn't it be the other way around? I mean, if you are LSB 3.2 certified
> > for sure you are CGL, but if you are CGL then by definition you do not fulfill LSB 3.2 requirements....
> 
> For *applications*, Dan had it right.  An application that uses no more 
> than the CGL subset interfaces will comply with the full LSB, since the 
> CGL subset interfaces are all part of the full LSB.  But an app 
> certified against full LSB could, say, use interfaces from GTK+, which 
> would not be part of the CGL subset.
> 
> You are entirely correct, of course, when describing distributions.


Ah!  I see the point now.  Yeah, definitely, an LSB distribution has a
much larger feature set than an CGL LSB distribution.  As a distribution
guy, I guess I'm more concerned about what application vendors can
assume based on my distribution's public statements, than what other
distributions might assume about us.

Anyway, yes, no argument here.  And actually I think that was the intent
of Dan's proposal.  That the CGL LSB profile will give the same sort of
guarantees about all distributions in that class to application vendors
but it would still be clear to everyone looking at the certifications
that if you're looking at a CGL LSB certified product it doesn't
necessarily have the same stuff as a full LSB product.

There would also be sort of an unspoken statement that if you can
certify your distro against the full LSB profile, that makes more
guarantees than the CGL subset, so registering against the CGL profile
might even tell a potential customer/client/partner/etc. what is not in
the distribution.

Joe MacDonald, Member of Technical Staff, Wind River
direct 613.270.5750  mobile 613.291.7421  fax 613.592.2283   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/lf_carrier/attachments/20080418/3ec34246/attachment-0001.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/lf_carrier/attachments/20080418/3ec34246/attachment-0001.pgp