Skip to main content
Unix & Linux

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

5
  • Thank you. I probably should have been clearer that I'm specifically interested in the kernel itself - which, I understand from sources like the Stultz above, is very similar to the mainline Linux kernel but not exactly. Would the Android variant of the Linux kernel itself be considered LSB (or POSIX) compliant? Commented Jul 28, 2014 at 18:30
  • 2
    Just to clarify: there's no such thing as a "POSIX kernel", because POSIX doesn't specify anything about it. Those specifications are about a userland interface, which can imply things about the kernel, but they don't say anything directly about it. So you are kind of off on an oxymoronical path...the LSB, as mentioned, is just extensions to POSIX. The linux kernel actually isn't "LSB compliant" because LSB is simply about userspace tools and interfaces. Presumably, you could rig any kernel up that way with enough tricks. So looking at Android in relation to LSB and POSIX... Commented Jul 28, 2014 at 19:18
  • 1
    ...again, it's a question about the user space. You can evaluate the Android kernel in relation to the vanilla linux kernel, but that really doesn't have anything to do with any particular standard. It's contrasting one specific piece of implemented software in relation to the specific details of an other. There aren't any external standards involved you could reference, AFAIK. Commented Jul 28, 2014 at 19:20
  • 2
    Put another way: in theory you could have a 100% POSIX compliant OS with no kernel at all, or rather, one which just required certain things from a kernel. POSIX itself doesn't say anything about this because it's about what and not how. And that "what" is in user space; part of the how is of course a kernel, but there are no specification, requirements, limitations placed upon it. Commented Jul 28, 2014 at 19:24
  • I've added a final few paragraphs about this ("To clarify this distinction regarding a user space oriented specification...") Commented Jul 28, 2014 at 19:48