[lsb-discuss] Inconsistency between glibc and POSIX fixed

Dirk Hohndel dirk.hohndel at intel.com
Wed Jun 21 11:35:06 PDT 2006

On 6/21/06 10:57 AM, "Theodore Tso" <tytso at mit.edu> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 10:03:47AM -0700, Nick Stoughton wrote:
>> On the other hand, this is a clear, simple, bug-fix, supported by the
>> upstream maintainer. I would be surprised if distro-vendors were unable
>> to patch their current glibc to handle this. I'd like to see this going
>> into 3.2 ... I don't want to preserve differences to POSIX artificially.
>> Its also fairly clear that few apps have been affected by this ... it
>> took a test suite to find it, and not an ISV asking why her app core
>> dumped. 
> Suppose 3.2 allowed both the correct POSIX behavior as well as the 3.x
> legacy behaviour; or suppose we issue waivers so that a distro with
> the bugfix will be able to get LSB 3.2 certification even though 3.2
> doesn't allow it --- what's the hit to application portability?  Will
> applications expecting the old 3.1 behavior misbehave horribly if we
> change or allow the change in the LSB 3.x series?  How many
> applications are there that may be affected by this?

I don't really like the idea of adding something that breaks 3.1 compliant
applications - so understanding the impact will be important.


More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list