From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Aug 26 10:21:14 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mail-ob.kamp.net (mail-ob.kamp.net [195.62.97.26]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A75A37B43E for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2000 10:21:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bsdevil.meta.net.ob.kamp.net (port-43.d.kamp.de [195.62.120.235]) by mail-ob.kamp.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e7QHL8V15403 for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2000 19:21:09 +0200 Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2000 19:21:08 +0200 Message-Id: <200008261721.e7QHL8V15403@mail-ob.kamp.net> From: Farid Hajji To: hackers@FreeBSD.org In-reply-to: <39A74783.FF8CF3AF@softweyr.com> (message from Wes Peters on Fri, 25 Aug 2000 22:28:51 -0600) Subject: Re: Moving FreeBSD towards glibc (or: FreeBSD and Hurd/Mach) X-Mailer: Emacs-20.6.1/FreeBSD-5.0-CURRENT Reply-To: farid.hajji@ob.kamp.net References: <39A74783.FF8CF3AF@softweyr.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > > are there plans to replace FreeBSD's libc with GNU glibc in the near > > > or medium future? Thanks for all your replies. I perfectly understand the reasons for avoiding GNU copylefted code like glibc in FreeBSD. Using the Hurd/Mach as kernel replacement for FreeBSD would indeed require adding the syscall emulation feature like in Lites/RT-Mach, linking against FreeBSD's libc and adding missing functionality as stubs. I just hoped it would be a bit easier ;-) BTW, I don't have any problems with the FreeBSD kernel itself or its libc. They are excellent and I'm using them both at home and exclusively for mission critical applications. Keep up the good work! -Farid. -- Farid Hajji -- Unix Systems and Network Admin | Phone: +49-2131-67-555 Broicherdorfstr. 83, D-41564 Kaarst, Germany | farid.hajji@ob.kamp.net - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - - - - - Murphy's Law fails only when you try to demonstrate it, and thus succeeds. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message