LSB Commands and Utilities, Draft proposal

Daniel Bradley d.bradley at
Sun Jul 11 20:13:36 PDT 1999

> Stuart Anderson wrote:

> Absolutely.  For my US$0.02, I'd like to see Linux match UNIX98
> exactly (with optional goodies either being truly "optional", or a common
> set of Linux extensions being optional).

Hang on though, lets just remember the context.

Linux = Unix98 should not imply LSB = Unix98.
LSB should not equal Linux.
LSB should be a subset of Linux.

Unlike mainstream Unices Linux has the potential to operate in a vast
number of radically different roles. Hence the LSB needs to be as small
as possible, to allow maximum flexibility.

For example, Linux as a gamer's platform. Another example is Linux being
used as the OS for Car MP3 players.

I'd be willing to bet that Unix will never enter these roles.

However, I'd definately agree that there need to be sets of guidelines
beyond the scope of the LSB, perhaps something like the "Linux Standard
Distribution" LSD :)

> Well <ahem> let's not forget the WOMANyears ;-)  UNIX98 is a
> nice, pre-existing standard.  It's also one that enough people like that
> they demand the big UNIX vendors provide UNIX98 compliant
> systems.

I just think that Linux as a Unix competitor is out of the scope of the


> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to lsb-spec-request at
> with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email listmaster at

Email: Daniel Bradley <d.bradley at>

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list