On Thu, 09 Jun 2016 15:02:29 +0200 Kamil Cholewiński <harry6...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey Kamil, > So libc is overkill, but instead you ship an entire tangled hierarchy of > nonportable and arch-specific headers to talk directly to the kernel, > which will all probably break in a random point release. I couldn't agree more. > > Overkill, don't need that much. This is so full of bullshit. There's no reason e.g. not to make it compilable on the BSD's. The Linux syscall-interface is also prone to changes. You should really re-think this decision. If you talk about overkill, what is the big deal? You'll find a libc in any system really, and even for crazy embedded cases, you could just create a statically linked binary. Cheers FRIGN -- FRIGN <d...@frign.de>
