1 |
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 14:57:19 -0800 |
2 |
david@×××××××××.com wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 04:40:39PM -0600, nDiScReEt wrote: |
5 |
> > <snip> |
6 |
> > I'd suggest you use glibc at the moment. A uClibc-based build will be |
7 |
> > incompatible with all the pre-existing binaries. |
8 |
> > |
9 |
> > p. |
10 |
> > <snip> |
11 |
> > |
12 |
> |
13 |
> Well that's all find and dandy in the binary distro world. But we're |
14 |
> gentoo people ;-) binaries ? rpms ? debs ? I jedi craves not these |
15 |
> things. |
16 |
> |
17 |
|
18 |
I dont either, but how are we going to build apps on this slow systems? Build them on a desktop with a toolchain, build them in the embedded system with distcc? sure, but if I want to build on my ipaq without a distccd farm or time on my hands? |
19 |
|
20 |
> uClibc does not "gaurantee" binary compatability among releases. Some |
21 |
> of the releases keep it, some don't. I don't think it would be a big |
22 |
> deal to have a flag in the ebuilds that said "ABI has changed, |
23 |
> recompile all packages" |
24 |
> |
25 |
|
26 |
Agreed. |
27 |
|
28 |
> The storage savings in embedded systems with uClibc is worth FAR |
29 |
> more(to me) than the occasionaly total system recompile. Especially |
30 |
> if distcc gets to the point where you can distcc your cross |
31 |
> compiles....</wish> |
32 |
> Dave |
33 |
> |
34 |
> -- |
35 |
> gentoo-embedded@g.o mailing list |
36 |
|
37 |
|
38 |
-- |
39 |
[-- Tiago Serra (aka cha0s) |
40 |
|
41 |
|
42 |
-- Key fingerprint: FC58 3001 1A0A 985E 9851 F428 1164 2F0B 8D66 2596 |
43 |
-- Pub key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x8D662596 |
44 |
|
45 |
Grand Master Turing once dreamed that he was a machine. When he awoke he |
46 |
exclaimed: |
47 |
|
48 |
"I don't know whether I am Turing dreaming that I am a machine, or a |
49 |
machine dreaming that I am Turing!" |
50 |
|
51 |
--] |