I fully agree on all those points you made.The conclusions I came up to so far are. 1. getting the route towards the bering-uclibc team, as I think that is where the future lies. 2. Kernel development can be done together. (2.4.23 , and later 2.6.0) 3. The solution I think Charles also suggested. using uclibc for the core. For special applications that won't compile use another library. but that isn't a floppy item anymore.
4 I still am interested in creating the Bering-light. or lite ? sounds good shortly before christmasWell, this surely could be a way to go - if you define light/lite. I think it's a fine line between making things as easy as possible for "the average user" and trying to apply to Linksys' or Netgear's customers.
2. Is it an option to bring the "new" packages with a script to help with replaceing for uclibc.I'm afraid I don't quite understand.
3 how many people use the old bering, and are willing to update anyhow.Of course, that's the main question - I _hope_ that there will be quite a few people willing to help out. I _know_ there are a lot of people working with Bering/Bering uClibc, but of course, working on something for oneself is different from being part in a project (I know that from my own experience - I've been working on/with LRP/LEAF for a _long_ time, but it took quite a while until I got involved officially).
Martin
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials. Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills. Sign up for IBM's Free Linux Tutorials. Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin. Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click
_______________________________________________ leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
