[lsb-discuss] ISV Survey- Perl,Python
robert.schweikert at mathworks.com
Mon Jul 9 08:15:11 PDT 2007
Stew Benedict wrote:
> As discussed in the call, here's a small questionaire for ISVs using Perl
> and/or Python. The application checkers are alpha/beta quality, but may
> be useful to expose issues and additional requirements. I would greatly
> appreciate as many ISVs as possible to respond to these questions.
> Proposed Perl Spec (The Perl Foundation has offered to provide a more
> "specification-like" document to use as a reference, we need to work
> with them to see if this can happen):
> Proposed Python Spec (this is a very early first pass at this document):
The string, os, and re modules are missing from the required set of
modules. I consider these essential. We might also want to consider
others from http://www.python.org/doc/current/lib/modindex.html
> lsbappchk.pl - application checker, based on the module list of the above
> spec (requires perl, lsb-tet3-lite), beta version:
> Sample output (can create tet journals also):
> [stew at presario30 tmp]$ lsbappchk.pl /usr/sbin/drakbackup
> lib is used, but is not part of LSB
> standalone is used, but is not part of LSB
> run_program is used, but is not part of LSB
> interactive is used, but is not part of LSB
> common is used, but is not part of LSB
> detect_devices is used, but is not part of LSB
> Mail::Mailer is used, but is not part of LSB
> lsbappchk.py - application checker, keyed from the Python/LSB module
> list (requires python), beta version:
> Similar behavior to the perl application checker, uses Python's
> 1) Do the proposed specifications meet your requirements for adding Perl
> and Python to the LSB?
I think cross linking to the language documentation is confusing. We
should have LSB focused doc (or links). Linking to the top level spec
presents a too big of a scope. Somehow this should be narrower.
> 2) Are there modules you require that are not part of the proposed
> specifications? (please list)
> 3) Do you have have the need for LSB to specify the C ABI to Perl, Python?
Yes, at some point in the future this should be included. I think LSB
should publish the plan on how we will get the languages fully
integrated in the future. Something like this maybe?
LSB - 3.2: Support a limited set of modules, no support for byte
LSB - 4.0: Support for byte compiled code
LSB - 4.x: Support for C ABI
> 4) Do you need support for bytecode compiled files in Python, or is source
> support adequate?
Need byte compiled code support
> Additional Comments:
I think the roadmap on how we will get from the initial addition to the
full integration is important. Then ISVs can plan at which point they
can potentially stop shipping Perl and/or Python.
Need a similar approach for Java.
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
(robert.schweikert at mathworks.com) LINUX
The MathWorks Inc.
Phone : 508-647-2042
More information about the lsb-discuss