Re: RE: [Lsb-cvslog] si/build/patches coreutils-i18n.patch, NONE, 1.1 coreutils-i18n-sort.patch, NONE, 1.1

At 2004/6/11 12:30-0400  [email protected] writes:
> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004, Marvin Heffler wrote:
> 
> > I added the patches since they are being used by the distros and it cleans
> > up the si test results very nicely. It's still a good policy to avoid
> > using patches that haven't been accepted by the upstream, but I would like
> > to see the si have much cleaner results. We can always back out the
> > patches if the consensus is that we shouldn't do it.
> 
> Consesnsus has been that we would only put these in when the upstream
> accepted them.
> 

If one of the primary purposes of the SI is to serve as a testbed to
test LSB applications, doesn't this mean the SI needs to be completely
compliant?

Regards,

Chris
-- 
[email protected]
IBM OzLabs Linux Development Group
Canberra, Australia