Re: Glibc-based Debian GNU/KNetBSD
Joel Baker <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> While I'd dearly love to see a bit more de-coupling of NetBSD kernel and
> libc (so that they don't have to be in quite such lockstep, though I'm more
> worried about the process utilities that must be *exact* matches), I don't
> claim that managing it would be trivial, and may not even be practical (or
> at least, might not be feasible short of 3.0).
BTW, NetBSD gets a lot out of the tight integration of the libraries
and kernel. What we get is completely seamless integration -- and that
buys us quite a bit.
In general, I can see why one would want to combine the advantages of
Debian and NetBSD, but I can't see why one would want to produce
something less functional than either. I think if you replace too much
of NetBSD in doing what you're trying to do, you just end up with a
crippled Linux rather than something synergetic.