epoll, LSB (was: Re: Problem roundup)
dank at kegel.com
Sun Nov 21 17:01:58 CST 2004
Dan Kegel wrote:
> 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.
For the record, I checked, and Red Hat 9's lsb-1.3 package
simply made ld-lsb.so.1 a symlink to ld-linux.so.2,
so that version of their lsb environment does seem to use
NPTL. Probably they figured they'd do something fancier
if they got any complaints, and since nobody was shipping
LSB-1.3 apps, they never had to.
It'll be interesting to see if LSB-2.0 apps actually get
deployed... having an argument about hypothetical pros and
cons is a bit sterile.
Trying to get a job as a c++ developer? See http://kegel.com/academy/getting-hired.html
More information about the wine-devel