[lsb-discuss] LSB 3.1 Update 1 status (and minutes for 2/20 and2/27)

Wichmann, Mats D mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Thu Mar 1 15:49:26 PST 2007


> Stew reports that, at the command line level, the switch is "-T core",
> which is mildly confusing (since it's actually Core and C++) and "-T
> desktop" (or no option at all, since "everything" is the default here
> too). Since most users will be using the DTK Manager, I'm not
> too worried
> about -T core, but I suppose if it's easy to fix, we could change it.

it's a long-standing issue that we've never really happily
solved. the most natural concept of "core" is the bits you
cannot do without, and for LSB since 2.0, that is defined
as including c++.  In the meantime, there was a module that
is named core, and that's what is sent to ISO, because they
weren't ready for (honestly, we arent' ready either) for C++
at that level of standardization, the module split had to
happen between that bit and c++ although we'd rather not
have done that.  Couldn't have sold "here's a proposed ISO
spec, but in that book, these three chapters are not 
candidates, please just ignore those".  

I'm inclined to pretend this dichotomy doesn't exist and
just have us adopt the principle of when we talk about the
core LSB we mean "including c++" although for the reason
just noted it's technically a separate module.  Unless we
can find another word with similar meaning and weight to
core and then we could adopt it.




More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list