From owner-freebsd-questions Mon Jan 20 12:25:58 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23CB437B401 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 12:25:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from fusion.wineasy.se (fusion.wineasy.se [195.42.198.105]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC8A243E4A for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 12:25:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from andreas@schuldei.org) Received: from petrus.schuldei.org (petrus.schuldei.org [81.27.1.16]) by fusion.wineasy.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8857580C; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:25:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from gabriel.schuldei.com (gabriel.schuldei.com [192.168.31.1]) by petrus.schuldei.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4931D4CE0B; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:25:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from lukas (lukas.schuldei.com [192.168.31.142]) by gabriel.schuldei.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B16901752E; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:25:40 +0100 (CET) Received: by lukas (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4DE2C2F0668; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:25:40 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:25:40 +0100 From: Andreas Schuldei To: "Neal H. Walfield" Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, debian-bsd@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: glibc vs BSD libc Message-ID: <20030120202540.GG30396@lukas> Mail-Followup-To: "Neal H. Walfield" , freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, debian-bsd@lists.debian.org References: <20030120130538.74079.qmail@web12606.mail.yahoo.com> <87bs2bpufr.fsf@bassanio.walfield.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87bs2bpufr.fsf@bassanio.walfield.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * Neal H. Walfield (neal@cs.uml.edu) [030120 19:10]: > > 3. > > Portability > > glibc:Portable to more than one Kernel and hence large > > BSD libc:Don’t attempt to be portable across kernels and hence > > smaller. > > I do not see the logic. If you are speaking about lines of code in > the distribution, I may agree, however, this does not speak to the > size of the generated binary, which seems to me to be what you are > referring to. i understood him this way: glibcs *portability* is large, since it is not only portabel over several archs but also over several kernels. bsds libc is less portable (only accross different archs) so its portability is smaller. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message