Re: klibc - another libc?

Sam Ravnborg
2006-06-10T06:13:41Z

> 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