On Sat, Aug 26, 2000 at 04:26:29AM +0200, Farid Hajji wrote:
> > The Hurd GLibC has a special property: It has almost the same interface
> > as the Linux GLibC,
> > because it comes from the same source tree.
> This is an interesting approach! We should really investigate this issue
> further. As
ent: Friday, August 25, 2000 8:04 PM
Subject: Re: Implementing binary compatibility with Linux, *BSD, ...
>
> > As a FreeBSD user, I'm not very well versed in current Linux
distributions.
> > But it is probably a good guess to assume, that some important
binaries
>
> As a FreeBSD user, I'm not very well versed in current Linux distributions.
> But it is probably a good guess to assume, that some important binaries
> there are statically linked and that others are only being ported slowly
> towards libc6/glibc2, right?
Pretty much everything uses g
> The Hurd GLibC has a special property: It has almost the same interface
> as the Linux GLibC,
> because it comes from the same source tree.
This is an interesting approach! We should really investigate this issue
further. As long as the Linux sysdeps have Mach/Hurd equivalents, it
has a real cha
Farid Hajji wrote:
>
> [Sorry to mail to both lists, but the topic _is_ relevant in both cases.
> BTW, could we _please_ reunify both lists?]
Actually, I think this is more appropriate to bug-hurd anyway (which is
the
actual development list).
> Abstract: The following mail contains a proposal
[Sorry to mail to both lists, but the topic _is_ relevant in both cases.
BTW, could we _please_ reunify both lists?]
Abstract: The following mail contains a proposal, discussion and technical
description on implementing binary compatibility of the Hurd to
binaries compiled fo
