I personally believe that layering the LSB is a **good thing**, however (there is always a however) the trap is that if you create to many layers, the possible combinations of layers means that you don't have a standard at all, and your back to square one. Layering can work if it is kept to two or three layers at most.
Phil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Sat, 25 Mar 2000, Greg Hayes wrote: > > > > > > > We should have a base LSB spec which excludes X to let handhelds and other > > > embedded applications be LSB compliant. > > > > > > Erik > > > > > > > Won't the handhelds use X to draw to the display? > > > > Gregory Hayes > > - > > > > > > > > Perhaps its a good idea to have a number of standard packets instead of > one standard base. I meand LSB - level 1 may include the very basic set > ( maybe just kernel and libc + some other very lowlevel stuff ). Level 2 > adds a little more and so on. > > Then when a software developer can look too the specs and decide wich > level his application reuires. The linux distributors can have options in > their installation to install up to a certain level. > > Well this is just a thougth.... > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
