Re: Is a binary with this libraries portable

On 29 Feb., 12:54, Rainer Weikusat <rweiku...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

with the environment used to develop some software. This can easily be
achieved by picking some set of 'supported' platforms and documenting
the compatibility requirements, so that people intending to use the
software on a non-supported platform can create such a compatible
environment if they so desire.

Well this is all what LSB is about.

I have some customers who are doing what you propose on MacOSX.
They purchased parallels emulator and run the windows version
on there Macs. But virtualisation is extremely heavyweigth and all
this
appliances (the new hype in the IT) is not a solution for a desktop
application. It's contradictionary. You want them to integrate not
isolate.

I really liked what i learned about LSB in the last days - the
documentation
is pretty easy to read. But i guess some geeks will ruin the effords
again.

Unfortunately the http://www.linux-foundation.org/ is also not good in
evangelism
for there linux standard base. They should really setup a list with
all conforming
apps, help the ISV's to market the applications and ideas and reduce
there fucking
fees to get a formal certification to maybe 10% of what they charge
now.
Certification for "Designed for Windows XXX" is exactly doing this
(its about US$ 129)
the last time i had looked at it.

This guys still have the attitude of all the UNIX consortiums that i
have seen in the
last millenium. They never learn. And from there application database
i see that they
have less certifcations then SCO is having active Unix users.

Thats why one organization is following the next and the next and the
next.
Welcome to the Unix world. I'm shaking my head about this since i
first
switched on a DEC Workstation in 1988.
.

Quantcast