On Thu, 4 Jun 1998, Matthew N. Dodd wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jun 1998, David Gould wrote:
> > Excuse? I think glibc is intended to be standard everywhere. As far as I
> > know, it has nothing to do with Linux other than Linux (as usual) is
> > faster to adopt it than some of the "legacy systems".
>
> 'standard' in what sense?
>
> In the sense that Linux uses it you are correct.
>
> I don't expect NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, BSDI, Solaris, Digital Unix, AIX,
> HPUX, SCO/Unixware etc to use it.
>
> In that sense Linux is still doing things its own way, breaking things for
> no aparent reason.
Actually, some year ago a group started up, I think they're called the
x86open group, that is working to making a standard c-library interface
for x86 based UNIX's. In that group, Linux, BSD *and* SCO and some other
commercial entities are represented. The plan is to use glibc 2 as a base.
Maarten
_____________________________________________________________________________
| TU Delft, The Netherlands, Faculty of Information Technology and Systems |
| Department of Electrical Engineering |
| Computer Architecture and Digital Technique section |
| M.Boekhold@et.tudelft.nl |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
