Re: libc headers issue
Can you please provide a simple-minded explanation of this situation?
What does all this mean to me? I like the idea of having my system
set up to just compile the kernel as God and Linus intended, and not
have another layer of complication in my life.
What in simple terms does all this mean to me, and why is this needed
for Debian? That is what I am wondering and what I would like to
know.
Alan Davis
On Thu, 25 Apr 1996, David Engel wrote:
> > The other people on the list have convinced me to drop the libc headers
> > issue. If you wish to continue maintaining it, please go ahead.
>
> I'm glad I decided to wait, cool off and see what transpired before
> posting another inflammatory message.
>
> I will continue to maintain libc on an interim basis. I would like to
> clarify a couple of points though.
>
> First, I did not mean to imply that I was not happy maintainlng libc.
> I certainly wouldn't have spent time fixing bugs and trying to improve
> it if I wasn't. I would prefer, however, to eventually hand off libc,
> binutils, gcc, etc. when someone who is capable of handling them comes
> along.
>
> Second, I do intend to update the kernel headers periodically or as
> needed. My intent is not freeze functionality at some arbitrary point
> in time. Rather, it is to restrict the risk of breaking compilation
> of most programs to well defined points when libc is updated. I will
> continue to lobby H.J. Lu to do the same with his upstream packages.
>
> David
> --
> David Engel Optical Data Systems, Inc.
> david@ods.com 1101 E. Arapaho Road
> (214) 234-6400 Richardson, TX 75081
>
>
Reply to: