[lsb-discuss] LSB conference call agenda (Tuesday, September 5, 11am ET)
Dallman, John
jgd at ugs.com
Tue Sep 5 09:18:07 PDT 2006
daniel.r.kegel at gmail.com wrote:
> > I'm an ISV working with this stuff. We find changing the compiler
> > perfectly acceptable, although the chroot environment isn't.
> I'm an ISV experimenting with this stuff, too.
> I think both are needed.
I agree.
> In very large organizations, you might find a preference
> for the chroot option, simply because it's more foolproof.
> On a small team, everyone can know "Oh, I have to be careful
> to not access anything not in the LSB", but when you have many teams,
> you can't expect knowledge to diffuse well,
> and a chroot helps enforce the rules a bit better.
In our fairly large organisation, we have a pretty much custom
development environment; developers can manage to run GCC raw,
rather than use LSBCC, but it's a lot more work for them, so they
don't.
This just varies widely; if chroot has users, then keep it going.
--
John Dallman, Parasolid Porting Engineer, +44-1223-371554
More information about the lsb-discuss
mailing list