On 18-04-2007 14:21:30 +0200, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> <discussion on ELIBC="linux">
> 
> > 
> > > IMO the easiest way is to say ELIBC="linux" - I've already
> > > empty-remerged system using this profile.
> > > 
> > > Maybe virtual/libiconv could avoid a dependency on dev-libs/libiconv for
> > > elibc_linux, but that's just an optimization.
> > 
> > Why avoid?  If you don't want to know about the installed glibc, you
> > need libiconv if you do iconv stuff, right?
> 
> I treat this as elibc_linux++.
> 
> Some more questions to think of when deciding to use GNU libiconv on
> linux (if answer='yes' then I'd say elibc_linux++):
> 
> Does uclibc lack (good) libiconv ?
> Are there other libc's possible for linux than glibc and uclibc ?
> Are there old glibc's around with bad libiconv implementations ?
> 
> If we do not use elibc_linux, and uclibc lacks libiconv, then maybe we
> need to know of elibc_uclibc too in prefix...

I don't know much (if anything) about libcs.  And I don't feel a direct
desire to learn about it now either.  So unless someone feels like
experimenting here, I'm out of ideas.

> 
> </discussion on ELIBC="linux">

-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

-- 
gentoo-alt@g.o mailing list