"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Yes. Linux isn't the main kernel that GLIBC supports to begin > > with. > > Really? Did you check it with Drepper of Red Hat, GNUtian ueber > moron ams? > > There is a reason why it is called the GNU C library.
<URL:http://www.gnu.org/software/libc/FAQ.html#s-1.1> The systems glibc is known to work on as of this release, and most probably in the future, are: *-*-gnu GNU Hurd i[3456]86-*-linux-gnu Linux-2.x on Intel m68k-*-linux-gnu Linux-2.x on Motorola 680x0 alpha*-*-linux-gnu Linux-2.x on DEC Alpha powerpc-*-linux-gnu Linux and MkLinux on PowerPC systems powerpc64-*-linux-gnu Linux-2.4+ on 64-bit PowerPC systems sparc-*-linux-gnu Linux-2.x on SPARC sparc64-*-linux-gnu Linux-2.x on UltraSPARC arm-*-none ARM standalone systems arm-*-linux Linux-2.x on ARM arm-*-linuxaout Linux-2.x on ARM using a.out binaries mips*-*-linux-gnu Linux-2.x on MIPS ia64-*-linux-gnu Linux-2.x on ia64 s390-*-linux-gnu Linux-2.x on IBM S/390 s390x-*-linux-gnu Linux-2.x on IBM S/390 64-bit cris-*-linux-gnu Linux-2.4+ on CRIS -snip- The old GNU libc supported other platforms, but at some point of time the availability of a production quality free kernel made it sensible to focus on those platforms which relied on glibc for a complete free system. In a similar vein, portability to compilers other than GCC has been flushed: no point in complicating the code for the sake of non-free alternatives when a good free one is available. The Hurd is not even of much interest to RMS himself anymore. No harm if it becomes feasible at one point of time, but nothing that is yet of major strategic interest to the GNU project. Linux fits the bill as a kernel well enough. Whether the GPLv3 controversy might be able to rekindle some of the interest remains to be seen. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
