Re: Shared Libraries and naming conventions
> The glibc developers have good reason to recommend egcs for compiling
> the library itself, and with the egcs^Wgcc steering committee being
> made the official maintainer of gcc, it's a moot point anyway.
Read the licenses, its not about _what_ you compile glibc with
> I find your suggestion that it contains code designed merely to "give
> cygnus a compiler monopoly" offensive.
Im not implying Cygnus were involved in generating the effect. Just that
it is there
> Other than that, there seem to be no issues, but the screenfull of
> warnings is ugly.
Compile a program with a non gcc compiler, link it with glibc 2
You are now required to give your program away under the GPL.
You have to use the GNU c compiler with glibc2. Thats unacceptable to
all the other compiler vendors. Things like Compaq releasing their own
optimising compiler go completely up the spout because of this. So it
favours one vendor. The vendor in question may not have caused it, but
its a clear and large problem.
Alan
Reply to: