Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 14:11:17 +0100 From: Pavel Cahyna <pcah8322@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> To: matthew green <mrg@eterna.com.au> Cc: debian-bsd@lists.debian.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: glibc vs BSD libc Message-ID: <20030124131117.GB836@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> In-Reply-To: <27656.1043412325@splode.eterna.com.au> References: <20030124102015.GB8015@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <27656.1043412325@splode.eterna.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, > the compat packages exist to provide missing libraries. the netbsd > libc "soname" has never changed -- it was libc.so.12 when the first > ELF port arrived, and it is libc.so.12 today. of course you can not So the ABI for libc didn't change since the introduction of ELF and no compat librairies for ELF programs are not needed? This is new to me and if is is so, it's very good! > ps(1) from netbsd 1.5 and above will work. programs like netstat and > other "kmem"/"libkvm" grovellers may or may not work. it all depends > on the relevant kernel structures not changing (too much?) kmem grovellers Yes, I expected this... > do not count as "portable programs" -- they do not use published API's to > gather info, but assume a particular format about how the kernel stores > things. netbsd has been moving away from kmem grovellers in a big way > for two main reasons: the binary compat issue, and, most kmem grovellers > are set-id to group kmem. removing both of these issues *is* a goal, but This is very good too! What is used instead of kmem, is it sysctl? > > does this clear it all up? [sorry for being so verbose] Thank you! Verbosity is a good thing. Bye Pavel To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030124131117.GB836>