Re: klibc development release

[H. Peter Anvin]

Erik Andersen wrote:
> 
>>to one side: I'm not fond of glibc and am looking to replace it in my own 
>>system, but it hasn't made it to the top of my to-do list yet.  (Dietlibc is 
>>straight GPL: it can't even be the dynamic replacement for glibc in a real 
>>world linux distribution.  HPA suggested I look at newlibc, which I've added 
>>to my to-do list).
> 
> As far as I know, uClibc is the only library that is able to
> replace glibc for real world linux distributions...  And I've
> looked long and hard (which was why I ended up making uClibc),
> 

This, of course, is not a goal for klibc at all.  I looked at uclibc,
dietlibc, and newlib before starting klibc.  klibc is meant to be *tiny*
first of all, and is very much not designed to be able to compile
arbitrary programs.

	-hpa