epoll, LSB (was: Re: Problem roundup)
dank at kegel.com
Sun Nov 21 15:48:46 CST 2004
Mike Hearn wrote:
>> I'm not aware of e.g. an LSB-1.3 application that doesn't run properly
>> on any system that supports LSB-1.3. Are you?
> I'm not aware of any LSB applications at all, actually. But let's take
> RealPlayer for example. Let's pretend that Real had made it an LSB app.
> Would that have saved it from being broken by NPTL. No. LSB doesn't
> specify (as far as I'm aware) that LSB apps must be linked
> against LinuxThreads.
Bzzt. In the real world, the distro vendor would have noticed
this during LSB certification, and since the shared library
loader for LSB 1.3 is /lib/ld-lsb.so.1 rather than /lib/ld-linux.so.2,
the vendor can easily force libc to be linuxthreads based even
if the default libc is NPTL based.
I believe that as people start building LSB-compliant apps,
they'll find it quite a useful way to avoid having to package
ten different flavors of their apps just to be compatible.
It's going to be a lot easier with LSB 3.0, since by that time
the C++ ABI will have settled down, but I do think even LSB 2.0
is worth looking at for some applications.
Yes, I know, you'll probably want to post something bitter and negative
about LSB in response, but I'm going to put my hands over my ears
and go "la la la", so I won't notice whether you actually do :-)
Trying to get a job as a c++ developer? See http://kegel.com/academy/getting-hired.html
More information about the wine-devel