Re: Glibc-based Debian GNU/KNetBSD
> > > We fixed pam to run on native libc a long time ago. It wasn't that bad,
> > > once I got libshadow written. And last I knew you didn't have an X
> > > server package, which I had on the native libc a long time ago.
> >
> > I was referring to the GNU/NetBSD port. See bug #201683 for example, and
> > compare it to the one-liner patch I sent to pam. As for Xfree86, try
> > "wc -l debian/patches/84*" in the source tree. Just a pair of examples.
> >
> > (btw, fixing the X server is on my todo)
>
> All I have to say about the X server, as the person who generated most
> of the patches, is that they're actually very straightforward, if rather
> invasive. I simply had to go through each config option and decide whether
> it should be handled in the 'native' way, or the GNU-userland way (and it
> was very much a userland issue, not a libc issue).
>
> The *hard* part was in hunting down build problems and bad assumptions in
> something the size of the X codebase. That isn't going to be any saner on a
> Glibc+FreeBSD system; probably less sane, in fact.
That was pretty much my experience, too. In fact, I tried to get it
working on glibc, and had fits with it. I particularly remember xterm
being a disaster. I gave up on it, and Robert evidently got it working
except for the server. It probably needs some headers in <sys/> that
glibc didn't get right.
---Nathan
Reply to: