[SuSE Linux] Watch out for this??
[notice: this is a modified version of another post] Hi, The "Linux Standards Association" was just announced on slashdot and is drawing a lot of flack. I think the Linux community needs to take notice. Read <A HREF="http://www.linuxstandards.org"><A HREF="http://www.linuxstandards.org</A">http://www.linuxstandards.org and see for yourself what's up. Reminds me of what almost (maybe did) happen to the X standard a few months back. They have all the bad charms, like vetos for paying members, the right to ban uncooperative members and (TM)'s all over the place. The fact remains that these people claim to provide a standards and reference organisation for all Linux and they intend to sell (literally) their concept to Big Corporations interested in porting their software to Linux. Before they get a foothold in too many doorsteps, SuSE, Red Hat, Debian and the users and developers in the Linux Community should take a good look at what's going on here and make a firm statement, ideally not in an uncontrolled screaming manner (which is probably going to happen in places like c.o.l.advocacy anyway.) This looks like something that needs to be dealt with, either way. ---------------------------------- <A HREF="http://benham.net/index.html"><A HREF="http://benham.net/index.html</A">http://benham.net/index.html -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS d+(-) s:+ a29 C++$ UL++>++++ P+++$ L++>++++ E? W+++$ N+(-) o? K- w+++$(--) O M-- V- PS-- PE++ Y++ PGP++ t+ 5 X R+ !tv b++++ DI+++ D++ G++>G+++ e h+ r* y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ---------------------------------- - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
On 18-Aug-98 Darren Benham wrote:
The "Linux Standards Association" was just announced on slashdot and is drawing a lot of flack. I think the Linux community needs to take notice.
Read <A HREF="http://www.linuxstandards.org"><A HREF="http://www.linuxstandards.org</A">http://www.linuxstandards.org and see for yourself what's up. Reminds me of what almost (maybe did) happen to the X standard a few months back. They have all the bad charms, like vetos for paying members, the right to ban uncooperative members and (TM)'s all over the place.
The fact remains that these people claim to provide a standards and reference organisation for all Linux and they intend to sell (literally) their concept to Big Corporations interested in porting their software to Linux.
Before they get a foothold in too many doorsteps, SuSE, Red Hat, Debian and the users and developers in the Linux Community should take a good look at what's going on here and make a firm statement, ideally not in an uncontrolled screaming manner (which is probably going to happen in places like c.o.l.advocacy anyway.)
This looks like something that needs to be dealt with, either way.
Well, I went and looked at their Web site. They're clearly at the very
beginning and hardly anybody belongs to the LSA. There are no "ratified issues"
and no "open issues". Everything to play for.
Despite Darren's disparaging comments, the arguments on their home page to the
effect that, with increasing commercial interest in Linux the firms porting
their stuff to Linux will need to know what they are porting it to, are sound.
Hitherto, the tendency has been either for a firm to offer the Linux port
effectively unsupported, or to declare that (e.g.) it works on RedHat-4.1
(and, implcitly, if you run it on anything else and it doesn't work, then
you're on your own).
Linux is too much of a bear-pit for this to be straightforward for most firms.
There IS a need for a "common standard" that the firms can aim at and support.
Until Linux gets one, FreeBSD wpould be a much cleaner option, for instance.
LSA may not be the people to provide the standard we need, and they may not do
what we would wish with the standard they come up with; but something is
essential. That part of their manifesto can't be faulted.
Best wishes to all,
ted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: (Ted Harding)
(Ted Harding) wrote:
Well, I went and looked at their Web site. They're clearly at the very beginning and hardly anybody belongs to the LSA. There are no "ratified issues" and no "open issues". Everything to play for.
Despite Darren's disparaging comments, the arguments on their home page to the effect that, with increasing commercial interest in Linux the firms porting their stuff to Linux will need to know what they are porting it to, are sound.
[snip]
LSA may not be the people to provide the standard we need, and they may not do what we would wish with the standard they come up with; but something is essential. That part of their manifesto can't be faulted.
They may be sound, but *who* are the LSA? That's what I want to know. I agree that the Linux community must come to a consensus about what should be in the os and how things should work, but I don't like the idea of charging people for a say in the matter. Does anyone know who started the LSA? The "From the Editor" section in LJ (#53) brought up the issue that have so many different distributions hurts Linux by creating competition between each other. There is also mention of a Linux Standard Base System Project, which to me would seem the way to go on developing a standard for Linux. Mark --inquiring minds want to know - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
On 19-Aug-98 Mark Wagnon wrote:
They may be sound, but *who* are the LSA? That's what I want to know. I agree that the Linux community must come to a consensus about what should be in the os and how things should work, but I don't like the idea of charging people for a say in the matter. Does anyone know who started the LSA?
According to the Web site, there are two "Charter Members" who appear to be "founder members": -------------------------------------------------------------------------- In support of this charter, the creation of Linux Standards Association and the commencement of operations as LSA the charter members are as listed below: Innovative Logic Corp. P.O. Box 1068 Laurel, MD 20725 V: (301) 490-7124 F: (301) 490-7162 NC Laboratories Inc. 4719 Quail Lakes Dr, Ste 6161 Stockton, CA 95207 V: (209) 956-3047 F: (209) 956-1747 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- and one listed "Regular [subscribing] Member": -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schwartz, President, UniTrends Software Corporation, CEO, Cactus International, Inc. (<A HREF="http://www.unitrends.com/"><A HREF="http://www.unitrends.com/</A">http://www.unitrends.com/) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- No "Observer members" are listed. By the way, the text of the Charter has a very professional style: this was put together with serious intent.
The "From the Editor" section in LJ (#53) brought up the issue that have so many different distributions hurts Linux by creating competition between each other.
There is also mention of a Linux Standard Base System Project, which to me would seem the way to go on developing a standard for Linux.
Sure. There is every argument for it. "Purists" claim that Debian is the
cleanest and most consistent, but this is not a distribution for the "common
man" as yet. Ones with most "commercial" or "popular" appeal -- such as
Red Hat & S.u.S.E. -- differ fundamentally. The Caldera stable are different
again. Even if you're deep into the Linux world, you can still wonder, not
only whether Application A will run as shipped on Distribution X, but even
whether it can be compiled without serious surgery. I mentioned FreeBSD before:
at least there's no doubt about what FreeBSD *is*, whether or not you like it.
I believe the Linux Standard Base System Project is the protegee of one
distribution, not a Linux-wide project. In fact, the only 100 per cent unifying
force in Linux is Linus Torvalds himself. Now if only Linus would define what
Linux really is ....
Nest wishes to all,
Ted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: (Ted Harding)
Sure. There is every argument for it. "Purists" claim that Debian is the I agree we have a need for a standard, what I don't like is the idea that only
On 19-Aug-98 Ted Harding wrote: people who pay for the privalage get to decide what that standard is...
I believe the Linux Standard Base System Project is the protegee of one distribution, not a Linux-wide project. In fact, the only 100 per cent It was actually the brain child of Bruce Perens, Erik Wathenstein and joined by many other "big names" in the Linux worlds (such as Allan Cox, SuSE and Caldera). The only notable absentees were Red Hat and Debian.
---------------------------------- <A HREF="http://benham.net/index.html"><A HREF="http://benham.net/index.html</A">http://benham.net/index.html -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS d+(-) s:+ a29 C++$ UL++>++++ P+++$ L++>++++ E? W+++$ N+(-) o? K- w+++$(--) O M-- V- PS-- PE++ Y++ PGP++ t+ 5 X R+ !tv b++++ DI+++ D++ G++>G+++ e h+ r* y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ---------------------------------- - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
On 19-Aug-98 Darren Benham wrote:
I believe the Linux Standard Base System Project is the protegee of one distribution, not a Linux-wide project. In fact, the only 100 per cent
It was actually the brain child of Bruce Perens, Erik Wathenstein and joined by many other "big names" in the Linux worlds (such as Allan Cox, SuSE and Caldera). The only notable absentees were Red Hat and Debian.
In that case it looks as though we're on the right track -- and that it's sorth
sticking with S.u.S.E.
A propos, therefore: since S.u.S.E. are involved, can anyone give any idea of
when theeffects of these standardisation efforts may begin to show in S.u.S.E.?
Best wishes,
Ted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: (Ted Harding)
Since the standard hasn't been finialized yet, I don't think anybody can be guessing on a final date... On 19-Aug-98 Ted Harding wrote:
A propos, therefore: since S.u.S.E. are involved, can anyone give any idea of when theeffects of these standardisation efforts may begin to show in S.u.S.E.?
---------------------------------- <A HREF="http://benham.net/index.html"><A HREF="http://benham.net/index.html</A">http://benham.net/index.html -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS d+(-) s:+ a29 C++$ UL++>++++ P+++$ L++>++++ E? W+++$ N+(-) o? K- w+++$(--) O M-- V- PS-- PE++ Y++ PGP++ t+ 5 X R+ !tv b++++ DI+++ D++ G++>G+++ e h+ r* y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ---------------------------------- - To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo@suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
participants (3)
-
gecko@benham.net
-
mwagnon@ixpres.com
-
Ted.Harding@nessie.mcc.ac.uk