From owner-freebsd-hackers Sun Jan 22 22:37:54 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) id WAA22211 for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 22 Jan 1995 22:37:54 -0800 Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.34]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.9/8.6.6) with ESMTP id WAA22205 for ; Sun, 22 Jan 1995 22:37:50 -0800 Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.9/8.6.9) id RAA20066; Mon, 23 Jan 1995 17:35:52 +1100 Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 17:35:52 +1100 From: Bruce Evans Message-Id: <199501230635.RAA20066@godzilla.zeta.org.au> To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org, rkw@dataplex.net Subject: Re: Which libraries? Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >In trying to fix some problems in wu-ftpd, I ran into the fnmatch >incompatabilities. They are straight-forward to fix. But in looking into >them, I found that there are 4 different versions of fnmatch.c in the >-current tree. There are about 17 different versions of getopt.c :-(. >Is there some reason that we are not using the libc version in each case? It takes too long to decide if an imported utility depends on the possibly nonstandard library sources that are distributed with the utility. Gnu getopt certainly has features that aren't standard are used by most gnu utilites. >And as for that, the version in libc is missing some of the options. >Is there some reason that our libc is not the glibc? glibc is copylefted. Bruce