John Plocher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [Followups to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Compatiblitiy is less trivial than you might belive but without conformance > > tests, we cannot claim anything about compatibility > > > ... > > > > > A distro alone cannot be a refernce. It must not even be changed for > > the compatibility tests. > > One of my comments on the wiki definition was along the lines of: > > We could, as a starting place for defining compatibility, > simply assert that there is a baseline (installer and > a set of versioned packages; a "recipe", if you will) > that must exist in any distro if it wants to claim > compatibility.
If there are several levels, e.g.: - Plain ON - ON + X - ON + GNUME it would allow to create application classes and to predict whether an application should run. If somebody e.g. includes add-ons in his libc, this does not help. This explains how hard it is to create a compliance test. Unless you know what odd interface you need to look for, you may only realize that a program compiled on 'A OpenSolaris' will not run on 'B OpenSolaris'. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org