LSB 2.0 and C++

LSB 2.0 and C++

Posted Aug 5, 2004 5:43 UTC (Thu) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054)
In reply to: LSB 2.0 and C++ by rriggs
Parent article: LSB 2.0 and C++

I'm sorry, but that's not very helpful either. Commercial software vendors need a standard to which they can deploy. There exist many commercial C++ libraries and applications with C++ APIs. Without a solid standard, it is very difficult to integrate more than one vendor's product.

Yes, but that's the same situation we've already been in. We've never had a standard C++ ABI, and everyone has limped along so far. Waiting to specify it won't make it worse.

If the LSB is released without a standardized C++ ABI, the de facto standard will become that which is in the current and future versions of RHEL.

I doubt it. Not enough people are willing to pay the price for RHEL for that to become the defacto standard.

As market leader, that's what the ISVs will target.

When you talk about market leader, you have to define the market. RHEL might be the market leader for a certain piece of the Linux market, but certainly not for the whole Linux market (which I thought LSB was targeting).

But at this point, any standard the Linux distributors can agree on would be good.

Yes, well, right now it looks like there isn't a single one they all can agree on yet. Some are on the gcc 3.2 flavor of "v5", while others are on the gcc 3.3 flavor of "v5", and the two are incompatible. Once gcc 3.4 spreads, it's more likely that the distributors will be able to agree on a standard -- v6. But that's not going to happen until next year.

Thus, it makes sense to wait until next year before defining this standard.

---

(Log in to post comments)