1 |
On 18-04-2007 14:21:30 +0200, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: |
2 |
> <discussion on ELIBC="linux"> |
3 |
> |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> > > IMO the easiest way is to say ELIBC="linux" - I've already |
6 |
> > > empty-remerged system using this profile. |
7 |
> > > |
8 |
> > > Maybe virtual/libiconv could avoid a dependency on dev-libs/libiconv for |
9 |
> > > elibc_linux, but that's just an optimization. |
10 |
> > |
11 |
> > Why avoid? If you don't want to know about the installed glibc, you |
12 |
> > need libiconv if you do iconv stuff, right? |
13 |
> |
14 |
> I treat this as elibc_linux++. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> Some more questions to think of when deciding to use GNU libiconv on |
17 |
> linux (if answer='yes' then I'd say elibc_linux++): |
18 |
> |
19 |
> Does uclibc lack (good) libiconv ? |
20 |
> Are there other libc's possible for linux than glibc and uclibc ? |
21 |
> Are there old glibc's around with bad libiconv implementations ? |
22 |
> |
23 |
> If we do not use elibc_linux, and uclibc lacks libiconv, then maybe we |
24 |
> need to know of elibc_uclibc too in prefix... |
25 |
|
26 |
I don't know much (if anything) about libcs. And I don't feel a direct |
27 |
desire to learn about it now either. So unless someone feels like |
28 |
experimenting here, I'm out of ideas. |
29 |
|
30 |
> |
31 |
> </discussion on ELIBC="linux"> |
32 |
|
33 |
-- |
34 |
Fabian Groffen |
35 |
Gentoo on a different level |
36 |
|
37 |
-- |
38 |
gentoo-alt@g.o mailing list |