Re: FreeBSD patch for dpkg?
On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 05:13:00PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 08:43:54AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
> > As for FreeBSD, I know some chunk of work was done on making it use glibc,
> > and at least one of the active glibc folks is wanting to get a FreeBSD box
> > to make sure new things don't break on it.
> that's great news!
If so, please ask him to use 5.0.
> Nathan, I don't mean to hurry you up, but if you have recovered your
> workstation and your data it'd be nice if you could put your GNU/FreeBSD
> tarball in a public place.
I have the workstation now. Just have to find time to sort out which
files need to be uploaded. As you can probably imagine, there are
several Gigs, and uploading that over dialup is a bit "awkward".
> With an upstream maintained Glibc on FreeBSD kernel it _does_ make sense
> to keep working on a Glibc-based GNU/FreeBSD system.
Not unless a solution can be found for the breakage in /usr/include.
With glibc, I am unable to build a _very_ large number of BSD system
utilities. I was making some progress, then discovered that _all_
networking headers were broken.
This is the single largest problem, and I don't see a simple solution.
glibc seems to assume a lot of things in /usr/include/sys belong to it,
and it's version of <sys/types.h> breaks probably >90% of FreeBSD system
Patching all FreeBSD headers introduces an unacceptable maintenance
headache, unless it can be done in an automated way. (i.e. somebody has
to hack system headers for every kernel release.) Fixing the compatibility
problems with glibc's <sys/*.h> would be better, but would probably introduce
headaches for glibc maintainers....
Then there are the license issues with certain kernel headers. :(