Re: RFC: Better portability for package maintainers
On Sunday 21 May 2006 19:44, Erast Benson wrote:
> So, why GLIBC is so important to you? What do you miss in SUN C library?
> And why do you think technically impossible to extend SUN C library with
> missing GLIBC functionality? I'm just trying to understand your point of
Glibc is so important to me because its license is proven being free and it
gets much more support/development/and user base than any libc in existance.
In addition I have some technical issues with sun's libc I'm not prepared to
discuss right now, and more importantly I'm not inclined to spent any time on
sources I personally believe are non-free software (I have legal issues with
the current CDDL 1.0, which have being discussed to death in the past and
which could be improved in the future ;-)
> > > porting effort might be greatly minimized by utilizing different
> > > approaches:
> > >
> > > 1) provide 100% Debian environment, so native Debian scripts will run
> > > as is;
> > > 2) extend SUN C library with missing GLIBC functionality;
> > > 3) use of side libraries like libiconv, gettext, libintl;
> > > 4) use of transitional packages.
> > Good. You are working for extending OpenSolaris kernel+libc, but why do
> > you believe it is technically possible and feasible to become an official
> > Debian port with such a system ? Being an independent OpenSolaris
> > distribution using packaging system from Debian should be enough for your
> > effort I believe.
> because non-glibc Debian architectures does exists (i.e.
Hm, I'm only aware of glibc-based Debian ports, like:
and they are not utopia ;-)
Could you point me to non-glibc Debian port please ? Note, that I'm not
against Debian non-glibc ports.
> and it is time to consider them and accept
> their existence. Those core architectures are open sourced and their
> communities will only grow over time. It is not like they will
> disappear, that means Debian must adjust to the new fact of life: "we
> have more than one major OS totally open-sourced at its core".
That is true, there are many open-sourced OS'es, or at least they claim to be
such, but this does not mean that it is technically and legaly possible and
feasible to make all of them official Debian ports.
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu>
fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB