[lsb-discuss] New package for future LSB version

[Matt Taggart]

Robert Schweikert writes...

> Since Linux is a major force in clustered environments would it make
> sense to try and include OpenMP in the LSB in the 4.0 time frame? To the
> best of my knowledge OpenMP is not shipped with distributions today.

So it fails the distribution and several other criteria currently,

http://www.freestandards.org/futures/criteria/index.html#distros

> However, the API is stable (since it is base on the MPI standard)

So it meets the stable criteria,

http://www.freestandards.org/futures/criteria/index.html#stable

> one could enforce that only the C interface is built to avoid any nasty
> C++ issues.

How does it do on the other criteria?

One question I have is,

Is it reasonable to expect that all installed LSB compliant systems have 
this interface available?

(Maybe that question should be an additional LSB criteria, we've always 
assumed it but it's not spelled out explicitly)
OpenMP strikes me as something that only the niche of clusting folks care 
about. I think standardization is a good idea, but as an optional module.

-- 
Matt Taggart        Open Source & Linux Organization R&D
taggart at fc.hp.com   Hewlett-Packard