Re: RFC: Better portability for package maintainers
On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 08:43:25AM -0700, Erast Benson wrote:
> > I'll agree with Josselin here: Debian is a GNU operatig system, not a
> > POSIX OS. If there are porting problems which are specific to Nexenta
> > and you want them to be integrated, you can provide patches. Or you can
> > port the GNU libc to Nexenta (and, after this happens, you can even
> > integrate Nexenta into Debian, why not?).
>
> Is that a requirement for Debian port (i.e. marked as "supported")? It
> is not correlates with what officials were saying in regards of
> non-glibc ports half a year ago. Could someone elaborate?
We had a pure NetBSD port before, but so far no non-glibc port got added
to the archive officially (but that doesn't mean it would get rejected
if it was of release quality).
IMHO a glibc-based OpenSolaris would certainly be the better and more
interesting option (but might take some effort initially).
Michael
--
<marco_g> I did send an email to propose multithreading to
grub-devel on the first of april.
<marco_g> Unfortunately everyone thought I was serious ;-)
Reply to: