Steve Langasek dixit: >We may yet want to move away from klibc on arm, but I don't see any
Actually, I’d quite like to get a working klibc on most linux-any ports in the medium term. My package mksh has a /bin/mksh-static which currently uses dietlibc, if available, eglibc otherwise. The state of dietlibc is… poor (especially on Ubuntu/arm*), and I had already gotten an older klibc patched up to do the job well enough (not just the English “good enough”). It’s even smaller, works de- cent and is pretty fast. (Actually I aim for replacing all ash and similar shells, too, but that’s my secondary goal.) With GNU libc, it’s a rather huge beast. Please keep this in mind. Thanks, //mirabilos • [email protected] -- FWIW, I'm quite impressed with mksh interactively. I thought it was much *much* more bare bones. But it turns out it beats the living hell out of ksh93 in that respect. I'd even consider it for my daily use if I hadn't wasted half my life on my zsh setup. :-) -- Frank Terbeck in #!/bin/mksh -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/527720 Title: thumb2 porting issues identified: klibc uses mov.*pc -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
