Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 06 Dec 2006 13:11:03 -0800 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: Linux should define ENOTSUP |
| |
Ulrich Drepper wrote: > On 12/6/06, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote: >> That's largely already the case, mostly because there is unfortunately >> still a fair bit of rubber-stamping Solaris going on. > > Don't say that, Peter. > > I'm working on the committee now for many years and got most changes I > (and those telling me their wishes) wanted through. This is very much > a technically oriented working group, not political. In fact, of the > regular members there are more with stakes in Linux than any of the > other OSes combined. If there are problems people perceive they can > file bugs on the OpenGroup's site > (http://www.opengroup.org/austin/defectform.html) or tell me about it. >
I'm quite aware of that, but I still think Sun has more resources to get their particular viewpoint through the committee -- it's just a matter of resources at hand. I myself had to largely drop out due to other pressures, for example.
Now, I'm much happier with Solaris being rubber-stamped than some other possibilities. However, it's very easy to sweep concerns under the rug by saying "legacy, out of scope."
-hpa - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |