[lsb-discuss] question on missing zcat command

Wichmann, Mats D mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Fri Jan 4 06:52:45 PST 2008


Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 10:40:19PM -0800, Wichmann, Mats D wrote:
>> I noticed that zcat is omitted from the LSB entirely
....
>> What should we do here?
> 
> Is there a reason _not_ to add zcat to the database?  Your assessment
> seems to be correct; this was probably an accidental omission, and the
> fact that we have test cases and a man page in the specification
> direction seems that the only thing we need to do is update
> database... 

I don't see a reason, but I'm asking in case...  

> BTW, where are we in terms of needing to provide an update to the ISO
> PAS specification, and/or providing erratas for ISO spec.  Yes, that's
> a lower priority item, but if it's easy for us to pay attention to
> that bit of housekeeping we might as well do it...
> 
> 	  	  	     	      	    - Ted

I am generating errata as I go along, in a form that isn't too
time-consuming to maintain.  This has a dual purpose, we can
also provide it as a reference in the non-ISO context if people
are interested in more detailed change information than a
Changelog-style list.  We haven't done errata in this detail
before, but I think the current level of maturity makes it
appropriate to do so anyway. There's a set of errata that 
reflects the delta from LSB 3.1 aka ISO-LSB to 3.1 Update 1; 
and there will be a set of errata from 3.1 Update 1 to 3.2,
although the latter is harder to do because of the addition of 
large chunks of stuff, even in the LSB-Core part that maps
to ISO-LSB.

It has been our (Nick's and mine) intention to submit first
errata to ISO, then start a revision (which might actually
be more appropriate at 4.0), such that we stay in line with
the loudly stated request from a number of voting countries
that LSB and ISO-LSB stay in sync. We've told SC22 that's what 
we intend to do.  That said, the work to get from where we
are today to taking care of the details is non-zero, and there
is not a resource that's going to make any real progress on
it as things stand today - below the ZBB line, as it were.

To get a flavor for what the current form of the errata look
like, see:

http://www.linux-foundation.org/~mats/tc1.txt

That set is essentially ready to go barring putting into
the proper formatting, handling some references, etc.







More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list