Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:27:01 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Atifa Kheel <atifa_kheel@yahoo.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, debian-bsd@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: glibc vs BSD libc Message-ID: <20030120222700.GB4380@rot13.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20030120130538.74079.qmail@web12606.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20030120130538.74079.qmail@web12606.mail.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--2B/JsCI69OhZNC5r Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 05:05:38AM -0800, Atifa Kheel wrote: Some other comments: > glibc support for standards: > ANSI C(ISO C) > POSIX (Pthreads support) > SYSTEM V > (Eg: > Malloc tunable parameter(mallopt) > Extensions : > Statistics for storage allocation with malloc(mallinfo) > _tolower() and _toupper() supported. If it's an 'extension', then it's not 'standard' and not worth using as a point of comparison. Basically, most of the things you list as "not supported" by BSD are better stated as being GNU-specific extensions that are non-standard and therefore incompatible with the rest of the world. > 19. > Extended Characters > glibc: Supported > BSD libc: No multi-byte character set functions.Breaks building UTF(Unicode) support in libncurses. wide character support is present in 5.0. Kris --2B/JsCI69OhZNC5r Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE+LHe0Wry0BWjoQKURAqn8AJ4z5+LYOrxR9Z3z8/ZcnTUCOoHzHACaAq8y YYg+wOi20rkWnfspjxNuq1U= =O1sK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --2B/JsCI69OhZNC5r-- 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?20030120222700.GB4380>