Hi Carmelo, On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 12:21:24PM +0200, Carmelo AMOROSO wrote: > I could agree with you, but one of the big concerns I often see (even in > the embedded world) with customers when trying to pushing them to > migrate fro a glibc based system to uClibc is about "compatibility" in > the most extended meaning. This is just one example. > > I'm strongly convinced that this is key in supporting the adoption of > uClibc vs glibc.
Unfortunately it makes uClibc become slightly more similar to glibc in size and complexity, too. I agree though that compatibility with [de-facto standards like] glibc is useful. Thus, indeed, why not let ldd do some extra stuff when this does not cost too much. Regards, Rune _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
