On Sun, 17.02.13 20:40, Vasily Kulikov (seg...@openwall.com) wrote: > > Be that as it may, for us only Linux is relevant, and that implies glibc > > (or some other implementation of libc that implements the very same > > interfaces.) > > Why does any Linux libc must implement the very same ABI? Binary > compatibility is an advantage of libc which might be very helpful in new > libc propagation, etc. etc., but it's totally irrelevant to applications.
I am pretty sure the little differences between the distros are one of the main reasons why our Linux application ecosystem is as fucked up as it is right now... If you want people to write apps for Linux, then the worst thing you can do is annoy them with little differences in the libc API, especially entirely pointless stuff such as whether NULL is defined as 0 or as (void*) 0... Also, systemd is not an application, anyway, it's part of the OS. For our project I can declare that we only support glibc (and compatible libcs), and nothing else. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
