[lsb-discuss] Inconsistency between glibc and POSIX fixed

Theodore Tso tytso at mit.edu
Wed Jun 21 20:03:05 PDT 2006

On Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 03:39:02PM -0700, Nick Stoughton wrote:
> The answer to that question is a definitive NONE! This change makes the
> specification more permissive, and does not change valid behavior in any
> way.
> On pre-bugfix systems, programs that used a feature documented in the
> LSB would core dump. On post-bugfix systems, such applications should
> behave as advertised!

Agreed, simply not allowing waivers for LSB 3.2 seems like the right
approach, as long as both distro's get early warning and a pointer to
the patch with the explanation that it's already in CVS.

If this sort of thing comes up in the future, a suggested way of
dealing with this is to require it, but to add a footnote stating that
(a) existing implementations don't implement the entire specified
POSIX specification, even though it is required by the LSB, so waivers
will be granted to LSB certified distributions, and (b) LSB conforming
applications should not make use of the subset that is not
implemented/not implemented correctly in common implementations, but
in a future minor update to the LSB, this restriction on applications
may be relaxed, and waivers no longer granted to distributions.

Would that all differences between the spec and reality be as easy to
reconcile, but in this case, it's fairly easy.  :-)

						- Ted

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list