Gentoo Archives: gentoo-embedded

From: Eric Radman <theman@×××××××.com>
To: gentoo-embedded@g.o
Subject: [gentoo-embedded] Is you're business going to depend on it?
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 14:03:26
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-embedded] Welcome by Seemant Kulleen
The discussion over glibc vs. uClibc is very important because every
system really has to be built, tested, and debugged with a specific C
library in mind. Fundimental functions like malloc() are sometimes
exhibit slightly different behavior.

Many applications and services will not compile against uClibc becuase
simply does not provide many of the functions that glibc does.(1) The
reason for this is because uClibc focuses on C89, C99, and SUSv3 (Single
UNIX Specification 3) compatibility, but not full compatibility with
glibc.(2) The selection of Diet libc is even more troublesome because it
is targets the development of binaries that are statically linked.(3)

I would argue that building a hardened platform requres the
standardization of basic programming libraries. Otherwise our motto will
be "it should work with whatever library you choose". Embedded sytems
such as routers fit into the mission critical category. On the other
hand, if someone's PDA freezes up once every 6 months nobody's going to

(2) Building Embedded Linux Systems (O'Reilly), p.134
(3) Building Embedded Linux Systems (O'Reilly), p.139

Eric Radman

On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 02:45, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> Well, look, we've had glibc (not sure if uclibc and dietlibc do yet), > PROVIDE a virtual/glibc (though, to be completely correct, it should > just be virtual/libc, but let's leave that aside). So this argument is > just an argument. The point of a virtual is that the user has the > ultimate choice to decide who satisfies the virtual. Why don't we just > leave it at that and move on
-- gentoo-embedded@g.o mailing list