| 1 |
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 04:40:39PM -0600, nDiScReEt wrote: |
| 2 |
> <snip> |
| 3 |
> I'd suggest you use glibc at the moment. A uClibc-based build will be |
| 4 |
> incompatible with all the pre-existing binaries. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> p. |
| 7 |
> <snip> |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Well that's all find and dandy in the binary distro world. But we're |
| 11 |
gentoo people ;-) binaries ? rpms ? debs ? I jedi craves not these |
| 12 |
things. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
uClibc does not "gaurantee" binary compatability among releases. Some |
| 15 |
of the releases keep it, some don't. I don't think it would be a big |
| 16 |
deal to have a flag in the ebuilds that said "ABI has changed, |
| 17 |
recompile all packages" |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
The storage savings in embedded systems with uClibc is worth FAR |
| 20 |
more(to me) than the occasionaly total system recompile. Especially |
| 21 |
if distcc gets to the point where you can distcc your cross |
| 22 |
compiles....</wish> |
| 23 |
Dave |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
gentoo-embedded@g.o mailing list |
Archives