From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932410AbWFJGNl (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Jun 2006 02:13:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932414AbWFJGNl (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Jun 2006 02:13:41 -0400 Received: from pasmtpa.tele.dk ([80.160.77.114]:41142 "EHLO pasmtp.tele.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932410AbWFJGNl (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Jun 2006 02:13:41 -0400 Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 08:13:28 +0200 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Roman Zippel Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: klibc - another libc? Message-ID: <20060610061327.GD8120@mars.ravnborg.org> References: <44869397.4000907@tls.msk.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Well for now you pretty much just moved code, that was in the kernel > before. What I'm trying to find out is what is coming next. How does e.g. > udev or modules fit into the picture? udev and module-init-tools fits nicely with the kernel. I never have understood this 'keep-everyhig-separate' mantra. Just see how many people had troubles with missing module-init-tools or people having troubles with non-backward compatible udev. > For -mm that's fine, but do you seriously expect it to get merged like > that. Again, what makes klibc so special, that it doesn't have to follow > standard rules? So part of what you ask for is a set of incremental patches that shows all the kernal modifications? That should be doable with some effort but unfortunately I'm not up to the task. Sam