[cgl_discussion] Typo in CGL requirements definition V2.0?

John Mehaffey mehaf at mvista.com
Wed Nov 12 12:38:56 PST 2003


Another typo, in PLT.1.0 (Page 32) it states that this was item
2.1.0 in v1.1, but it was item 2.1.3.

Another, larger issue is what to call the items that were brought
forward from the v1.1 spec unchanged (Page 94).
For instance, category platform, item 2.2 (Remote boot support)
Does (or will) this have a PLT.x[.y] number? I don't think we can
just call it PLT.2, as there is already a PLT.2.0 that is on a
different topic.

What happened to v1.1 items and  Were these
subsumed into PLT.1.0, carried forward unchanged, or deleted?


John Mehaffey
MontaVista Technical Marketing

John Mehaffey wrote:

> I am going through the requirements for CGL 2.0,and have found
> what I believe to be a typo in the doc.
> Page 29, item STD.2.20 (thread safe functions) claims to be
> useful for POSIX timers, but I believe that it should read
> POSIX threads.
> Best Regards,
> John Mehaffey
> MontaVista Technical Marketing
> _______________________________________________
> cgl_discussion mailing list
> cgl_discussion at lists.osdl.org
> http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/cgl_discussion

More information about the cgl_discussion mailing list