LSB1.1: /proc/cpuinfo

Joerg Schilling schilling at
Thu Jan 3 17:03:48 PST 2002

>From alan at Fri Jan  4 01:59:30 2002

>> The reason was that "cdrecord dev=xxx ..." won't work because the bit mask 
>> definitions in ctype.h did change and for this reason, cdrecold by using 
>> getallargs would assume that dev= is not an option but a file type argument.

>SuSE and Red Hat managed to get different glibc 2.0 ones. Thats a somewhat
>seperate issue, and thats the kind of thing the LSB is precisely there
>to ensure doesn't happen again.

>Thats not a compatibility argument so much as a clear explanation of why
>the LSB matters

I am happy to see LSB as it makes Linux go towards a system that may be used 
by combining binary compilations of programs on many systems if it is done 

Right now, when I am forced to make binary only versions of programs like
e.g. the the Plextor firmware upgrade program, I can only do it for 
and for glibc-2.2. Anything in between gives problems.


 EMail:joerg at (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js at		(uni)  If you don't have iso-8859-1
       schilling at		(work) chars I am J"org Schilling

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list