Re: Glibc and NetBSD
This whole conversation seems baffling to me. Have any of the people
posting opinions actually looked at the source code of the two libcs ?
glibc is a complex horror [1]; the BSD libc is a fairly nice and clean
implementation. It seems to me that there is little doubt which libc
we would prefer if we want good code quality.
Also, nearly all of the programs in Debian are _supposed_ to be
portable to BSD anyway, at least upstream. Pretty much anything that
doesn't work is either a bug in the Debian package, or in the BSD
libc.
I understand that the i18n facilities in the BSD libc are not
currently adequate or working and that this is a considerable problem.
This is of course a bug in the BSD libc, but surely we can just punt
on it by supplying a bunch of stub routines ? Debian GNU/BSD won't
have i18n then of course until the BSD libc is sorted out, but that
seems fair enough. If i18n people don't like that they can go and
work on the BSD libc.
Ian.
[1] I tried to fix a bug in its stdio recently and discovered that
glibc contains two complete but mutually incompatible implementations
of stdio ! The one that's actually usually used is a layer over a
strange beast that's written in C but is isomorphic to C++ iostreams
(which results in an astonishing mess).
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: