> I think many people would argue that given the stability of given a > system as a whole, a random crash once per 5 years would be prefereble to > a severe performance penelty which impacts the system on a continuous > basis.
I would argue the exact opposite. We're talking ARM here, i.e. embedded systems. On those systems, it's much easier to counter performance issues than stability issues. If a box crashes, there's nothing we can do - the customer will just return it. I'm advocating the use of uClibc in the embedded boxes I'm writing software for. My arguments are low resource consumption, and stability. What am I going to tell my management if you purposefully remove the stability? I will have to switch libcs. Again. Make it work, then make it work fast. -- Laurent _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
